Second member of LHSA the R10 is confirmed

[ruiespanhol]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello,

 

Second to this link FreeLists / leicareflex / [LRflex] Re: R-10 Confirmed! the R10 is confirmed by Mr.Kauffman:)

 

Best,

[rsolomon]

im not sure who wrote that but it does not look or sound official in anyway. it sounds more like a blog or a diary....

 

 

 

.....and for the record i predict an R11.... remember you heard it here first ......

[jquimby]

A little more detailed info, cannot make any claims about the accuracy of this info...

 

the following is quoted in its entirety from the following link:

 

FreeLists / leicareflex / [LRflex] R-10, M and X camera Info (long)

 

begin quote: "

 

* From: David Young <telyt@xxxxxxxxx>

* To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

* Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 18:42:33 -0700

 

Good Evening all:

 

 

As most of you know, Rose and I attended the LHSA's annual convention, this past weekend. There Herr Andreas Kaufmann, owner of Leica, spoke of their plans for the next generation R camera.

 

He played his cards very close to his chest, and was very coy about his answers. Other than confirming that a new 'R' camera would be introduced at Photokina, he gave very little information, as one might expect.

 

He said that the "final form" of the camera was presented to the Board, for production approval, and that approval was given within the last week. Thus, the design is set. He showed not the camera, but only a photo of the box in which it was carried into the board room!

 

Coyly, he asked: "What might the model name be? I cannot say, but if you can count to 10, you will probably have a good idea! What will be the features of this new camera? Think of a wish list... auto-focus? A full frame sensor? A sensor perhaps larger than full frame?"

 

As many of you know, I, along with Howard Cummer and three others, had the pleasure of meeting with Steven Lee, Stephan Daniels and Maike Harberts, for three hours at the '06 Photokina - to discuss the future of the 'R' series. I now feel we can now discuss, publicly, the idea of a "larger than full frame sensor", now that Hr. Kaufmann, has said it publicly. Until now, I have been prevented from mentioning such things, as it would be a violation of the NDA, we signed. My lips will remain sealed about all other items discussed at that meeting, until such time as they are publicly addressed by Leica officials. However, if Hr. Kaufmann has raised them, then I feel they are now "fair game".

 

This last bit, about a "larger than full frame" sensor, was discussed at that 2006 meeting. At that time, I wondered if it was an indication of their thoughts, or if it was simply (as Agatha Christie's Piorot would say) "A blue herring", to throw us and, more importantly, Leica's competitors, off track. One audience member asked if a larger sensor would require a larger mount - and if this was to happen, would current 'R' glass be able to be used. Hr. Kaufmann replied: "A solution is in the pipeline."

 

This "larger than full frame" (24x36mm) sensor idea has me bothered a bit.

 

 

If it is much more than, say 15% bigger, it would undoubtedly require a body larger than the R8, something nearly everyone who completed last fall's survey indicated they did not wish.

 

That being said, if it is, say, 15% larger (no size was given - 15% is my guess), it would have the advantage of either (a) more pixels - like Canon, ( larger pixels - like Nikon or © a bit of both. It would also require a new mount, although we were promised, a year ago, that any mount change would permit existing R lenses to be used, in aperture priority mode, at the very least. A new mount might still be needed, even if the sensor is "merely" full frame, in order to accommodate Auto-Focus.

 

If the sensor is larger than full frame, a new series of lenses would be required to take advantage of that, for the image circle of the existing glass would likely not perform to it's max over a larger area, though that might differ, lens to lens. Assuming the traditional 2:3 aspect ratio is preserved, an adapter could be rigged to turn off the outer, 15% (or whatever it really is) when existing R glass was used. This, however, would reduce the number of pixels recorded. Thus, you would have a lower resolution, full frame image, with existing glass and a larger, higher resolution image with the new lenses. A simple line on the VF screens, as was used on the DMR, would suffice. Add in AF, and you have powerful reasons for buyers to step up to the new glass.... something Leica needs, as there is more money in lenses than in bodies.

 

Of course, if the sensor were made 36mm square, the image circle of existing glass would be able to handle that, without problem. Photos could, of course, still be cropped to the traditional 24x36mm. Please note: this last bit, about a square sensor, is simply my speculation.

 

However, a larger sensor would require a larger mirror, which would make it almost impossible to swing the mirror up, while still using existing "R" glass. This problem is made even more significant by the need to make the registration (the distance from lens flange to sensor/film plane) a few millimeters shallower than on previous R cameras, in order to allow for an adapter, so existing 'R' glass can be fitted, while still focusing to infinity. Should the sensor be made square, this would be virtually impossible, for the mirror would have to be much larger!

 

No matter how they do it, if the sensor is to be "larger than full frame", it will take some really creative engineering to preserve the use of 'R' glass. Thus, I still think this is a "blue herring". However, I have been known to be wrong, before!

 

No mention was made as to number of pixels or other specifications. However, Hr. Kaufmann did confirm that Leica have twenty-four (count 'em ...24!) new lenses in development! If we assume that 6 new "M" lenses per year is overkill, that still leaves 18 new lenses for the "R" line. Whether they are required for AF, or for a larger sensor, or both, only time will tell. But there is no doubt, that an entire new fleet of "R" glass is on the horizon. Hr. Kaufmann also indicated that Leica are moving fast towards a policy of having stock available for shipment almost as soon as products are officially announced. If this is realized, then we should see a new "R' camera and an entire line of new lenses, by the end of next year.

 

When asked if the new lenses would be AF, Hr. Kaufmann simply replied "Think about your wish list."

 

When asked if the new lenses would be metal, as now, or employ some polycarbonate or other "space age" materials, he simply said "I am sorry, but I am not allowed to answer that question."

 

Hr. Kaufmann also confirmed that there will be a new "M" camera introduced at the '08 Photokina and implied that it would have the Infra-red filter built-in. He gave no other details.

 

He also indicated that "Camera X" would be introduced. It is not known by that name, but he said that this was how he would refer to it at this time. He gave no more information, but a chart of the line showed it as being near the Digilux 3 - perhaps a possible replacement. This makes me wonder if Leica plan to skip the latest incarnation of the Panasonic DSLR and have something else by fall! Time will tell.

 

Whatever the new cameras are to be, Leica have just over 11 months to tool and produce. They are going to be busy beavers!

 

Let the speculation begin!

 

Cheers!

---

 

David Young,

Logan Lake, CANADA"

 

end of quote

[jquimby]

As I have now spent way too much time reading all of the threads on this, i can add the following unconfirmed information from the same source as above:

 

Leica Cinema has been created

 

Hr. Kaufmann has now acquired 100% of all outstanding shares of Leica and will be taking the company private in November

 

When Kaufmann was asked to substantiate the rumor of an f/0.9 Noctilux he was quoted as saying "Some rumors are true" (no mount was specified and the authenticity of that quote would not hold up to journalistic scrutiny, as everything I have quoted here...)

[stunsworth]

Of course, if the sensor were made 36mm square, the image circle of existing glass would be able to handle that, without problem. Photos could, of course, still be cropped to the traditional 24x36mm. Please note: this last bit, about a square sensor, is simply my speculation.

 

That isn't necessarily the case, if the image circle just fits a 36mmx24mm area, then it won't cover a 36mm square format.

[mjh]

Of course, if the sensor were made 36mm square, the image circle of existing glass would be able to handle that, without problem.

No, it wouldn’t. The diameter of the image circle is 43.3 mm for a 36 x 24 mm sensor, but 50.9 mm for a square 36 x 36 mm sensor. That’s almost halfway towards the 60 mm image circle of a typical MF sensor (48 x 36 mm).

 

However, a larger sensor would require a larger mirror, which would make it almost impossible to swing the mirror up, while still using existing "R" glass. This problem is made even more significant by the need to make the registration (the distance from lens flange to sensor/film plane) a few millimeters shallower than on previous R cameras, in order to allow for an adapter, so existing 'R' glass can be fitted, while still focusing to infinity. Should the sensor be made square, this would be virtually impossible, for the mirror would have to be much larger!

As a matter of fact, this would be next to impossible for almost any kind of “larger than full-frame” sensor, except perhaps for a sensor that is just wider, but preserves the 24 mm height – a 16:9 sensor, say (42.7 x 24 mm).

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm, 16:9, that would be interesting <grin>

[masjah]

Hmm, 16:9, that would be interesting <grin>

 

Hmmm. If you wanted a 16:9 within the same image circle as the existing R lenses, then you would need a sensor approx 21.2mm x 37.7mm (38mm would work OK in practice). So you could have a 24x38 sensor to have a choice of 3:2 or 16:9 formats. But that's hardly gaining very much over simply letter-box cropping a standard 24x36 frame yourself!

[mjh]

Hmmm. If you wanted a 16:9 within the same image circle as the existing R lenses, then you would need a sensor approx 21.2mm x 37.7mm (38mm would work OK in practice). So you could have a 24x38 sensor to have a choice of 3:2 or 16:9 formats. But that's hardly gaining very much over simply letter-box cropping a standard 24x36 frame yourself!

The idea is that with a 42.7 x 24 mm sensor, you could use a 36 x 24 mm crop with existing R lenses and the full sensor area with new glass. Not that I am advocating any of this; actually I believe that going beyond 36 x 24 mm with the R10 is a bad idea.

[andybarton]

I think that they should have a sensor with the largest available width, for the maximum sensible/practicable mirror.

 

If that means 43 x 24, that would be a fine compromise.

[mgcd]

An interesting read. The bottom line is that we still don't know and there is just enough info to speculate in a few directions. My own rationalisation (if not speculation) of the information presented would be that a larger sensor, if that's the case, would simply avoid additional light fall-off and vignetting in the corners for a "full-frame" 24x36mm gate and taking full advantage of already existing ROM correction, thereby avoiding mirror and mirrorbox redesigns and allowing full use of R lenses along with (perhaps) a new crop of R lenses allowing for additional elements of the "wish list".

 

That was my (flawed) bit. Now, I'll just have to wait and see.

 

Cheers,

[AlanG]

I think everyone is missing a significant reason for going with a larger than 24x36mm sensor. That would be to have sensor based image stabilizing and still use a 24x36mm shutter opening. Otherwise, if you wanted a 24x36mm stabilized sensor you'd have to make a larger shutter opening to allow room for the sensor to move within this opening. You'd also need lenses that cover a larger circle. However, if you use a slightly larger sensor, then you can move it relative to the lens and shutter opening with no other design issues. This would be appealing to Leica and its users as it would add image stabilization to photographs with all existing lenses. I think cleaning the sensor could be a complicated situation they'd have to solve.

 

This is just a thought. I have no idea if Leica or anyone else is going this route. But it seems to me that if a manufacturer wants to incorporate IS on a full frame camera, this would be a lot easier than the alternative. (Assuming they can get an affordable sensor this size.) Otherwise, I can't think of any logical reason why Leica would make a larger format camera considering what Canon and Nikon are able to do within 24x36.

[rosuna]

I think all these rumors are nonsense.

 

If you ask "will the R10 have a larger sensor?", the answer of Leica has been "yes"... but you should read "yes, it will have a larger sensor (24x36 instead the 1.37x cropped of the DMR)".

 

"A new mount will be required?". Leica: "Yes"... and this means that "Yes, several changes for AF on the R mount will be needed (contacts, etc), but it will be 100% compatible with existing lenses. So, the basic specifications of the R system will remain unchanged".

 

That's all.

 

Some people made wrong interpretations from those "yes": bigger sensor than 35mm format and uncompatible mount.

 

Source: DSLR Magazine - Leica R10?

[mjh]

With sensor-based image stabilization, the sensor moves within a larger area and thus the image circle would need to be bigger. But there is absolutely no reason to enlarge the sensor; in theory, the sensor would need to be smaller. In practice, the image circle of the lenses will be large enough to allow for the rather small amount of sensor movement necessary for counteracting camera movement, so the sensor size can stay the same. For example, the sensor-based image stabilization technologies employed by Olympus, Pentax, and Sony work quite well, even when lenses optimized for FourThirds or APS-C sensors are used and the sensor moves within an area slightly larger than the FourThirds or APS-C format.

[mjh]

If you ask "will the R10 have a larger sensor?", the answer of Leica has been "yes"... but you should read "yes, it will have a larger sensor (24x36 instead the 1.37x cropped of the DMR)".

Here’s the alleged Kaufmann-quote: “Think of a wish list... auto-focus? A full frame sensor? A sensor perhaps larger than full frame?” He is talking about a larger than full frame sensor, not a larger than 1.37x crop sensor. If the quote correctly captures what he has said, your interpretation is wrong.

[rosuna]

I wasn't referring to Kaufmann's jokes, but Leica's consistent answers from a period of 2 years. The rumour of a bigger than FF sensor wasn't started by Kaufmann a few days ago.

[Bob Ross]

Thoughts on a larger sensor and existing lenses.

Most R lenses have an image circle larger than the 43.5 diameter required to cover the 24 X 36mm frame. How much bigger may depend on the focal legnth and curvature of field. A marginally larger sensor would work with an increase in registration distance (to keep infinity focus) and the use of off-set micro lenses could help correct any unwanted curvature of field introduced. A different (new) mount for longer registration distance and a larger mirror to pick up the larger projected image would be in order, along with a new prism/finder.

Would anyone happen to know Leica's design policy for actual image circle or have check it on an optical bench? That might tell us how far they can go.

Bob

[robsteve]

Hello,

 

Second to this link FreeLists / leicareflex / [LRflex] Re: R-10 Confirmed! the R10 is confirmed by Mr.Kauffman:)

 

Best,

 

Who was the first member to confirm it?

[Riley]

With sensor-based image stabilization, the sensor moves within a larger area and thus the image circle would need to be bigger. But there is absolutely no reason to enlarge the sensor; in theory, the sensor would need to be smaller. In practice, the image circle of the lenses will be large enough to allow for the rather small amount of sensor movement necessary for counteracting camera movement, so the sensor size can stay the same. For example, the sensor-based image stabilization technologies employed by Olympus, Pentax, and Sony work quite well, even when lenses optimized for FourThirds or APS-C sensors are used and the sensor moves within an area slightly larger than the FourThirds or APS-C format.

 

yes i think thats right, yet the new L10 and E-3 share similar sensors but it seems with different iterations there are different ways to count the Mp.

 

E-410/E-510 = 10 MP effective, 10.9 M photosites

L10/E-3 = 10.1 MP effective, 11.8 M photosites

3648 x 2736 pixels

 

all four models have exactly the same maximum pixel count on output: 3648 x 2736.

I think the Mp went up for 2 reasons, added a dark noise register and to cover the higher IS requirement of E3. Although I believe the sensors movement would be tiny, it was suggested perhaps 1/20th of a mm.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[R10dreamer]

Arguing over speculation seems to be the main hobby in here. Leica has to make an R10 to stay in the SLR business. That is an obvious conclusion. What, how and when is all speculation at this point. Why not just sit back and enjoy the wait. Similar to presents under a Christmas tree. No fun in knowing what you are going to get. It is always better to be surprised. At least we know we are going to get a present and that is the most important piece of information anyway.

 

Cheers.