A Very Smart Move for Leica ? or ! ... :)

[FastFashnReloaded]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4/3rds will robably be dead in a few years or only show up in low end DSLR or P&S cameras. High image quality depends to a large part on the size of the receptor wells of the sensor and 4/3rds has the smallest on the market, (short of the tiny chips used in point and shoot bodies.)

 

For good dynamic range and low noise performance you need big receptors. That why almost all of the high-end bodies are at least APS-H (x1.3) or full frame. APS (x1.5) is being abandoned for these type of cameras, because it appears that 12-14MP is the maximum you can get out of them and still deliver pro level IQ.

 

Blah blah blah. How about this? Canon will probably be dead in a few years because people will be tired of look-alike creaky camera bodies, lousy kit lenses and sarcastic, underachieving, evangelical "photographers" whose only purpose in life seems to be to get you to buy more stuff exactly like what everyone else has.

 

"For good dynamic range and low noise performance you need big receptors." No, what you need is good thermal control and good design.

[hankg]

Phase One sent me sample images comparing subjects shot on their various backs with the same subjects shot on a Canon 1DsII. (They've been trying hard to sell me a system for a couple of years.) The differences were there but not so amazing or compelling to me..

 

 

They may not have been so amazing to you but quite a few MF photographers who had gone 35mm DSLR have in the last few years gone back to MF with the new MF backs. Phase and Hasselblad have been doing much better recently. The MF companies like Hasselblad and Mamiya are moving to the 35mm DSLR paradigm and Canon with the 1DS III is encroaching on MF territory. A lot of Art Directors in major markets expect MF systems to be used for their work. Leica would not be inventing a new market segment if it introduced a larger then 24x36 higher then 22MP camera. They would be right in the sweet spot where 35mm and MF are colliding for market share with studio photographers. These photographers want cameras more like MF boxes without so many gizmos more aligned with Leica ergonomics and they are used to paying $3,000 + for glass.

 

I think event photographers for the most part have gone 35 DSLR and are really not a factor in this equation. Their needs are more in alignment with sports shooters and PJ's.

[ptomsu]

Man, how far away from the R10 discussion are we already?

[Riley]

4/3rds will robably be dead in a few years or only show up in low end DSLR or P&S cameras. High image quality depends to a large part on the size of the receptor wells of the sensor and 4/3rds has the smallest on the market, (short of the tiny chips used in point and shoot bodies.)

 

For good dynamic range and low noise performance you need big receptors. That why almost all of the high-end bodies are at least APS-H (x1.3) or full frame. APS (x1.5) is being abandoned for these type of cameras, because it appears that 12-14MP is the maximum you can get out of them and still deliver pro level IQ.

 

it amazes me that the technical expertise still reveals tripe like this. An nMOS sensor will only use one N-type silicon to operate. A negative charge puts the transistor into the off position and a positive charge puts into the on position.

 

A CMOS (complimentary metal oxide semiconductor) is thus named "complmientary" because it involves utilizing both transistor types both N and P wired together, thus taking up twice the space, but using less power. So if one of the two is removed, it would cease to be a CMOS.

 

CMOS gained so much popularity because it consumes less power than either P or nMOS because combing the two allows the semiconductor to draw zero current until it is switched on or off. The advantage nMOS has over CMOS is that it has half the wiring, thus has more sensor real estate to use for photosite wells. CMOS can never reduce the number wires per photosite, otherwise they cease to be CMOS.

 

While you may imagine the world is moving to 35mmFF vehicles, Canon's own data reveals that 5D sells a tiny 1% of its dSLRs, adding the 1.3x crop amounts to just 3%. The other 97% are APS C dSLRs and last time I looked, they dont look like being abandoned..

 

As to good DR specifically, where is it written in stone 4/3rds has inferior DR? Even the Fuji F30 had quite reasonable DR with its relatively small 1/1.7" sensor.

The Digilux 2 is another with good DR, this with just a 2/3" sensor, how then do these cameras fit within your notion that 'big receptors' are a requirement.

[AlanG]

... They would be right in the sweet spot where 35mm and MF are colliding for market share with studio photographers...

 

I'm not sure that competing against the Canon 1DsIII on one end and the H3 on the other end would be such a sweet spot.

 

A good friend of mine recently bought a 31 megapixel Phase One back and Mamiya system. He thought the files he got from it were great but didn't feel it was responsive enough and felt it didn't work with his shooting style. So he sold it. He then bought 2 M8s to use along with his Canons and seems happy for the time being.

 

I am just trying to make the point that there is often more to getting the image you want than color bit depth and resolution.

[sdai]

A good friend of mine recently bought a 31 megapixel Phase One back and Mamiya system. He thought the files he got from it were great but didn't feel it was responsive enough and felt it didn't work with his shooting style. So he sold it.

 

Well, that's exactly something Leica could tackle with with a 4:5 21MP R system camera. I've no doubt that such a thing would be responsive enough and fits into your friend's shooting style.

 

I could be wrong ... but then Leica should prove it.

[hankg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not sure that competing against the Canon 1DsIII on one end and the H3 on the other end would be such a sweet spot.

 

A good friend of mine recently bought a 31 megapixel Phase One back and Mamiya system. He thought the files he got from it were great but didn't feel it was responsive enough and felt it didn't work with his shooting style. So he sold it. He then bought 2 M8s to use along with his Canons and seems happy for the time being.

 

I am just trying to make the point that there is often more to getting the image you want than color bit depth and resolution.

 

Alan I was really commenting on the impression that MF was dead and 35mm DSLR's had taken it's place. That simply isn't true. Some former MF market segments have been lost to 35 but MF back sales have been doing quite well compared to a few years back and Phase One and Hasselblad actually turned profitable as a result of surging MF back sales.

 

Combining Leica's reputation with optics and Phase Ones dominant position in high end digital would certainly earn the system a look especially from a lot of Contax/Phase and pissed off Hasselblad/Phase users who are now in dead end systems.

 

What will happen in the future? Who knows the nimble and innovative will survive.

[AlanG]

Alan I was really commenting on the impression that MF was dead and 35mm DSLR's had taken it's place.

 

I'm certainly not saying that MF is dead. Quite the contrary I think it is a maturing product. And the H3II looks incredible. I just said MF wasn't that appealing to me at this time. After looking at the technology in the H3II I have a hard time seeing anyone competing with it. (Even Rollei, Sinar, Leaf.)

[sdai]

After looking at the technology in the H3II I have a hard time seeing anyone competing with it. (Even Rollei, Sinar, Leaf.)

 

Actually, there're some limitations in the H3D2 ... I don't think you can unmount the back and use it with other cameras due to the proprietary interface (not 100% sure about this, correct me if I'm wrong), for that purpose you'll have to buy the CF backs, that leaves the market open for Leaf, Sinar, etc ... problem is, almost all other MF players are out of the game except Hassie and Rollei, and Rollei does not compare to Hassie in terms of market share.

[AlanG]

Actually, there're some limitations in the H3D2 ... I don't think you can unmount the back and use it with other cameras due to the proprietary interface (not 100% sure about this, correct me if I'm wrong)

 

Well we're on to this discussion about MF because you proposed that Leica make a larger than 35mm camera. So I hope nobody minds. MF digital is something I've checked out pretty carefully since the first Leaf backs came out around 10 years ago.

 

Here's what Hassy says about the H3II....Modular design for flexibility

To further increase usability, the H3DII has been designed to allow the

digital capture unit to be detached and used on a view camera by way

of an adapter. When used in this manner, the unit is controlled by the

flash sync signal from the view camera shutter...

 

I suggest anyone interested read the H3II tech sheets...

Technical info - H3DII

 

Hassy has incorporated something they call "Ultra Focus" along with "Digital Auto Correction." This was fascinating to me and shows the extent they have gone to incorporate electronics and firmware to get the best out of their lenses and sensors. (Ultra focus adjusts for focus shifts that occur when stopping down.)

 

For me, here's the situation in a nutshell. I used to use 4x5 (and rollfilm backs), 6x6, and 35mm systems. The Canon has enough flexibility to allow me to do all of my work with one system. This is great for travel and general convenience on any job. To go with an MF and get the flexibility I need, would require using an H3II, an Alpa (or similar wide angle body) with 24mm Digitar and maybe 28 and 35mm Digitars or Rodenstocks, plus also use my Linhof Technikardan view camera (possibly requiring some new lenses) for normal and longer focal length architectural work. And I still wouldn't have the fisheye, long lenses, or shooting speed that I get with 35mm, so I'd have to use 35mm too. If I were a portrait or fashion shooter, I might not need much versatility and could use just the H3II. Plus what happens if the MF digital back breaks on a shoot? You can't back it up with 35mm if you promised the client MF, so you need two.

 

It isn't the cost alone ($50K-$100K) that is keeping me from going with MF, it is that I don't feel the quality gain is offset by the added complexity, slow shooting, size, and weight. (With MF backs you have to do a color calibration test shot each time you use a shift, rise, or fall.) But if my clients had required it, I would have done it already. As it is now, I tell clients that if they need better quality than I can do with the DSLR we can always shoot on 4x5, 6x12 or 6x9 film. (Few have required this.) When the 1Ds first came out, it never occured to me that it would replace the rest of my gear.

 

So my bottom line for Leica is that whatever Leica comes out with, it should be a very easy to use and versatile system. (Several TS lenses with the shortest being as wide as a 24mm on full frame 35, fisheye, etc.) I don't think competing with Hassy is the way to go unless they can do it as well and offer more.

[sdai]

Well we're on to this discussion about MF because you proposed that Leica make a larger than 35mm camera. So I hope nobody minds.

 

Well, I don't earn any credit on proposing a larger than 35mm camera ... it's really just that many folks have confirmed that they've heard about this directly from Leica, incl. Maike Harberts.

 

the H3DII has been designed to allow the

digital capture unit to be detached and used on a view camera by way

of an adapter. When used in this manner, the unit is controlled by the

flash sync signal from the view camera shutter...

 

If you umount the H3D2 back and adapt it to an Alpa or any other things, all the fancy stuff incl. Ultra Focus and DAC are lost. So every other back is on the same ground as the H3 back.

 

I don't think competing with Hassy is the way to go unless they can do it as well and offer more.

 

I think Leica knows about this pretty well ... a larger than 35mm DSLR such as the hypothetical 28x35 model is by no means competing against the Hassie but, it'll certainly set Leica apart from other 35mm cohorts such as Canon and Nikon.

 

Many folks have agreed that in order to serve a good niche, Leica has to very well define the niche ... IMHO a 4:5 DSLR should serve this purpose well.

 

With regards to PC lenses, extending the shorter side from 24mm to 28mm also gives more room to tilt.

[AlanG]

If you umount the H3D2 back and adapt it to an Alpa or any other things, all the fancy stuff incl. Ultra Focus and DAC are lost. So every other back is on the same ground as the H3 back.

 

I was just answering your question about the H3II. The point was that any expensive system can more easily be justified if the back can be removed from one camera and used on another. This provides for increased versatility, mechanical redundancy and for future updating.

 

Personally, whatever Leica said about using a larger than 35mm full frame sensor, I seriously question if that meant they were planning to build an R body with a slightly larger than 24x36 format. I'm guessing (only guessing) they were speculating about the possibility of building a full frame system with a larger stabilized sensor. This would be unique and could help keep their lenses current. A different format seems like too ambitious a project to me especially if it is only going to have very slight differentiation from the 35mm full frame competition.

 

Whatever they do they need to figure out a way to both retain current R users and still appeal to new users. And it may be difficult to appeal to new users unless Leica can keep its pricing a bit more competitive.

[sdai]

Whatever they do they need to figure out a way to both retain current R users and still appeal to new users. And it may be difficult to appeal to new users unless Leica can keep its pricing a bit more competitive.

 

I certainly won't panic even if there turns out to be nothing at all ... I can still mount these R lenses on Canons or use the old DMR till it breaks down.

 

I don't think that Leica has too much concern about price ... IMHO, anywhere between 8k -10k is very acceptable to this level of customers, worst case scenario, a body incl. a decent kit lens sold for 12k-15k ... nothing more than Toyota Corolla, and most American families already have one too many cars. LOL

 

I may not buy it, you may not buy it ... but many other folks will buy it. After all, even 0.1% of the DSLR market is a LOT for Leica.

[AlanG]

I certainly won't panic even if there turns out to be nothing at all ... I can still mount these R lenses on Canons or use the old DMR till it breaks down.

 

I don't think that Leica has too much concern about price ... IMHO, anywhere between 8k -10k is very acceptable to this level of customers, worst case scenario, a body incl. a decent kit lens sold for 12k-15k ... nothing more than Toyota Corolla, and most American families already have one too many cars. LOL

 

I may not buy it, you may not buy it ... but many other folks will buy it. After all, even 0.1% of the DSLR market is a LOT for Leica.

 

I have no idea. I'd hate to be in the camera business these days. I've been attending the PhotoPlusExpo (and previous incarnations) since they started many years ago. Once upon a time this was a show that catered to commercial and advertising pros. (Sponsored by PDN!!!) It has been shocking to me to see the decline and consolidation of the industry. But times change and the show reflects this. The show seems to be more focused on selling wedding albums, services, software, semi-pro and consumer cameras than anything else. (Those manufacturers can make money through repeat and volume sales.) The high end and specialized players are either long gone, marginalized, or have a greatly reduced presence. (Sinar, for instance, had a pretty small booth compared to the old days.) I think this show reflects the sad state of the industry. Some big players are doing ok. The rest are having a tough go at it.

 

Even the lighting companies had little presence. One used to see Elinchrom, Goddard, Balcar, Speedotron, Norman, Bron, and several others and you could study their systems in detail. Now only a few remain with small displays.

 

You still can find the unique products such as specialized cameras and backs, but from the interest I saw at their booths, I bet they won't be able to justify coming back too many more times.

 

Leica at least has the M system to keep them unique and must be careful as they are walking a tightrope. I can't tell anyone what to do, but from my own perspective, I'd like to see Leica or someone else make a compact high image quality 4/3rds to 1.3x format optical viewfinder type (AF or electronic focus confirmation) with a reasonably fast (2.8?) 24-70 or longer equivalent stabilized permanent lens. If it shot and processed raw files as fast and as well as consumer DSLRs I think it would sell. But then again, I'm not in the camera business and they make their money from the lenses... Also, if the 4/3rds dslr systems were PenF or Pentax 110 size they would have really been interesting.

[hankg]

Even if the sensor is slightly taller they might preserve the register by a mirror that slides a bit as it travels up. I think Hassy did this in order to get full image with some lenses.

 

The future seems to be in tightly integrated systems that can bring software to bear on lens correction and image quality. I think MF and high end 35mm photographers would be lining up to have a look at a Leica/Phase integrated DSLR. It would cause a huge buzz. If they could deliver the goods it could put Leica back in the center of pro photography which is the new managements goal.

 

They must have wanted Sinar for a reason.

[sdai]

The high end and specialized players are either long gone, marginalized, or have a greatly reduced presence. (Sinar, for instance, had a pretty small booth compared to the old days.) I think this show reflects the sad state of the industry. Some big players are doing ok. The rest are having a tough go at it.

 

I share the same sentiment as you do, Alan. But it appears that there's still a fairly large amount of profit margin in the 35mm market, the turn around of Leica after the M8 introduction proves exactly that they can still kick, and live well.

 

Even by going into the MF territory (a hypothesis anyways), there's still a lot Leica can do and make some money comfrotably ... think about this, if Mamiya can do a 22MP ZD for 9999 (list price), why can't Leica do a 21MP something for slightly more (if not less)?

[AlanG]

Even by going into the MF territory (a hypothesis anyways), there's still a lot Leica can do and make some money comfrotably ... think about this, if Mamiya can do a 22MP ZD for 9999 (list price), why can't Leica do a 21MP something for slightly more (if not less)?

 

The Mamiya was announced more than 3 years ago. (I played with one at the show back then.) By the time it came out, it was too late to generate much buzz. I can say that I didn't see too many people lined up at the places where they could play with Mamiya ZDs, Rollei Hy6 (There were probably ten of these at the show), Alpa, Seitz, or other MF and specialized cameras. (The people at some of those booths would have talked to me for hours.)

 

And the Hy6 seems like a finished product. I played with it and it seemed to work perfectly. Yet they told me it wasn't ready for sale yet. I asked what it would cost and the Rollei people said they thought it might be around $12,000 with the 80mm lens and a film back. (No digital back.) Rollei sells it that way whereas Leaf sells one with its backs and Sinar sells it with its backs. And it uses expensive lenses. This price sounds way too high to me and probably is incorrect. However it showed me that the weren't ready to sell me one yet. So how "inexpensive" do you think a Leica/Phase One camera could be?

 

You might think Leica should do this or that. I can't say you or others are wrong. I used to write and market software for slide labeling and stock photo management. I thought everyone would buy a copy once they saw it. I was wrong. It is easy to get enthusiast about an idea but it is much harder to develop a competitive product, make a good business plan, and carry it out.

[lct]

...anywhere between 8k -10k is very acceptable to this level of customers...I may not buy it, you may not buy it ...)

And i would not buy it either. So who would purchase this 8k -10k beast in your opinion?

 

...if Mamiya can do a 22MP ZD for 9999 (list price), why can't Leica do a 21MP something for slightly more (if not less)?

Because they have to sell their stuff perhaps?

[hankg]

The Mamiya was announced more than 3 years ago. (I played with one at the show back then.) By the time it came out, it was too late to generate much buzz. I can say that I didn't see too many people lined up at the places where they could play with Mamiya ZDs, Rollei Hy6 (There were probably ten of these at the show), Alpa, Seitz, or other MF and specialized cameras. (The people at some of those booths would have talked to me for hours.)

 

You might think Leica should do this or that. I can't say you or others are wrong. I used to write and market software for slide labeling and stock photo management. I thought everyone would buy a copy once they saw it. I was wrong. It is easy to get enthusiast about an idea but it is much harder to develop a competitive product, make a good business plan, and carry it out.

 

Whatever they do, if it costs more then a Canon 1Ds MKIII it had better have supernatural powers. A lot will depend on the economy -if we have a global slowdown and sales fall off for photographers in general that would be the end for a lot of marginal players. If the global economy continues to expand at a decent clip it will mean expanding new markets in places like China, Brazil, Russia, India, etc., It's a much bigger world now with much bigger markets.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[sdai]

And i would not buy it either. So who would purchase this 8k -10k beast in your opinion?

 

Many folks who spent the same amount of money on the 1Ds, 1Ds2, 1Ds3 and still want a little step further.

 

Because they have to sell their stuff perhaps?

 

That's true ... but what I meant to say was, the cost of medium format digital shouldn't be that high, Mamiya could still make some money by selling a 22MP ZD at 9999 ... Hasselblad can command such an astronomical price simply because of the lack of competition.

 

How many backs do you think Phase One could sell in a year? and they're hiring that many people sitting in the office at the cost of 5 digit or 6 digit paycheque per head count, hanging around showing their products, burning advertising dollars on almost every mainstream photography magazines and sponsor trade shows worldwide.

 

Man, there's a lot of money to make in the business ... digital camera is a high margin product.