R 10, new traditions ?

[rsolomon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you think the R10 will be a 4/3rds mount.....

 

 

if so why ? if not why not ?

 

 

and do you think the Digilux line and the R line both continue on, does leica maintain two SLR's in the lineup....

 

 

if so why ? if not why not ?

[Advertisement]

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

[sdai]

You know what, Rich ... I have dealer friends in Hong Kong, Japan, Canada ... US. 4/3 cameras don't sell well.

 

Rumor from China is they're grinding the serial numbers off from bodies bound for export and dump them as gray imports or factory refurbs at ultra low prices.

 

If Leica wants to commit suicide, then do it with 4/3.

[marknorton]

Yes, you can just imagine the strategy planning meeting "R10 - A New Direction".

 

"We're going to catch the competition by surprise! They all think we're going for a bigger sensor than the DMR.... they're wrong! Our secret weapon, which will tell them we haven't just lost the plot, we never knew it existed, is to use a smaller sensor. Bigger is better, so how about this for an advertising strap line: "Move over to Leica R10 - the camera with the bigger crop factor!""

 

I think the 4/3 adventure has been a disaster for Leica - you only have to look at the increasingly desperate sales promotions to know that they are log-jammed with product they cannot shift, undercut by the Panasonic which has sales problems all of its own. 4/3 is surely not long for this World.

 

If I was them, I'd get everybody to hide under their desks when a new batch of Digilux 3s is due. "Return to sender, no one brave enough to accept delivery".

 

The best that can be said for the Digilux 3 is that Leica can claim they have a digital SLR. Of sorts. For now.

[carstenw]

Mark, I am not sure that I agree that 4/3 is dead. I think that Olympus is pulling it off in style, but Leica is too expensive, and Panasonic has no good strategy so far.

[mym6is12]

It might have made sense for Leica to have a high end full frame R10 and a 4/3 offering.

But it's difficult to see where Leica can successfully fit.

 

In the sub £800 price point, the new smaller DMC-L10 seems short on quality and overpriced compared to the 40D and D80 and £450 E-510.

 

At £1000+ an Olympus E-3 competitor would need to be seriously good.

Perhaps that's where PanLeica was aiming with the DMC-L1/Digilux3.

For newcomers, 4/3 needs to be sold on small lenses and light cameras - something the Digilux3/14-50 failed on big time. With DMC-L1s available at under £800 the Leica Digilux £1225 ( inc £565 discount ) very few will ever move ( the black L1 is most peoples preference anyway).

 

I don't think they will aim at that price point again, making the 25 f/1.4 the first and last of it's kind. ( BTW: it seems to be very sharp, with only the very slightest of coma at the far corners.) I'm certainly not banking on Leica adding any more 4/3 primes.

 

I'm absolutely certain there is a 4/3 market - it's just not so easy defining it.

Personally,I would not buy into a full frame, full weight R system and long fast lenses.

 

But, I've recently started a 4/3 system: a E-410 and 25 f/1.4 with a E-3 arriving on Monday, then a 50 f/2, 150 f/2 to follow.

I think the image stabilised E-3 body with fast lenses will compliment my film M system and M9 when it appears ( in a year or so).

[stevelap]

Do you think the R10 will be a 4/3rds mount.....

 

 

if so why ? if not why not ?

 

 

and do you think the Digilux line and the R line both continue on, does leica maintain two SLR's in the lineup....

 

 

if so why ? if not why not ?

No, not unless the R9/DMR replacement is called the R11.

 

I originally posted the comment below in another thread but it's also relevant here:

 

Originally Posted by ravnishgandhi.com

"My dealer in melbourne tells me it will be aud 20000+ as it is a 20 megapixel camera meant to compete with medium format".

 

 

Just a thought, and meant to be nothing more than harmless speculation, so no need for anyone to break out the worry balls just yet....

 

A while ago we heard from someone at the LHSA that Leica top-brass had hinted at a 'full frame or larger' R9 replacement. If we assume for the moment that this is going to happen, it could indeed be that this camera eventually surfaces as an ultra expensive (almost a certainty, this is Leica after all!) near medium format IQ machine.

 

Now that (for the sake of clarity let's call it the 'R10') would be a superb camera I'm sure, but what of the price differential such a strategy would leave between it and both Leica's and their competitors other dslr offerings? Well, a large price gap is of course a potential marketing opportunity waiting to be filled, perhaps one that Leica might decide to fill with a suitable product based on it's ties with Panasonic and the 4/3rd's consortium.

Depending upon Leica's stance on the financial v brand dilution argument and the future viability of the 4/3rd's format, this could evolve into a second tier Leica dslr (again, for clarity let's call it the Digilux 4) based upon the recently released Olympus E3 and it's Panasonic cousin. Such a camera would still have more than a whiff of badge engineering about it of course, hence the finance v brand argument, but early reports suggest that the E3 at least is shaping up to be a reasonable product.

 

Personally I'm looking forward to welcoming the R10 as a full frame replacement for the R9/DMR, but if it's price goes stratospheric might there just be room for something else, dslr, beneath it? Although I too believe that the jury is still out over 4/3rd's.

[rsolomon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't using 35mm full frame as the basis for sensors really retrofitting, or "forcing an old tradition" i mean to say using 35 mm film strips, then stretching it to 36mm to provide the more pleasing 2 x 3 ratio was a great invention....and using small negitivies to produce large pictures changed the photgraphic world, but maybe it is time to redesign based on today's information and state of technology .

 

 

Wasn't 4/3rds designed for digital sensors for various reasons.

 

1. The smaller sensor size makes possible smaller and lighter camera bodies and lenses. In particular, the potential exists for very fast lenses and very high quality lenses at lower costs

 

2.the light traveleing to the sensor is traveling perpendicular to the sensor, resulting in brighter corners, particularly on wide angle lenses

 

3,Because the flange focal distance is significantly shorter, SLR lenses can be fitted to Four Thirds cameras with adapters, unfortunately they require manual setting of aperture (and focus)

 

 

i do understand the disadvantage that a smaller sensor is more prone to noise, espeically at iso greater then 400 , but with technology advances this will get better

 

Also the DOF issue, at times and advantage, at time a disadvantage

[rosuna]

Leica can offer profitable products for the 4/3 market. They have made a small investment on it at the moment. Panasonic developed the LC1/Digilux3 and distribute and manufacture the "Lumix" lenses.

 

I am not sure about the profitability of the only 4/3 offer of Leica: the Digilux 3. Maybe replicating Panasonic's cameras adding a mark-up for the red dot. It is not good in the long term though, because the brand suffer an erosion (you know you are paying a substantial mark-up just for the brand).

[hdg]

Another idea: What do you think about 16:9? I think this could be the future size.

And by the way: I am cropping most of my 3:2 pictures to a 2:1 format because I feel this is more near the real human physiology.

 

Regards Hans

[AlanG]

4/3rds cameras and lenses did not turn out to be significantly enough smaller and lighter to offset their lower image quality and other shortcomings when compared with APS and full frame. So why would anyone pay a premium for this?

[AlanG]

Another idea: What do you think about 16:9? I think this could be the future size.

And by the way: I am cropping most of my 3:2 pictures to a 2:1 format because I feel this is more near the real human physiology.

 

Regards Hans

 

My clients don't want very many of their images in such an elongated format. The pictures are not used on their own and must be flexible enough in shape to be used in various orientations for layouts.

[marknorton]

Mark, I am not sure that I agree that 4/3 is dead. I think that Olympus is pulling it off in style, but Leica is too expensive, and Panasonic has no good strategy so far.

 

Carsten, I certainly agree that Olympus have made a better job of it than Panasonic and it's a pity it's not the Olympus 510 which is available as a rebadged Leica. I think Leica would have done rather better with it than the new low-end Panasonic effort which may or may not appear with a red dot.

[thrid]

4/3rds is a technological dead end.

 

Nobody has been able to build a 4/3rds sensor that can even match the performance of a APS chip, let alone APS-H or full frame. It's also probably never going to happen, because the sensor wells are too small to deliver noise free images with good dynamic range.

 

4/3rds was conceived a long time ago, when there was doubt that anyone was going to be able to produce sensors larger than APS at an economical price.

 

I'm guessing that 4/3rds will be dead or relegated to the low-end consumer market in 2-4 years.

 

My guess is that the R10 will be full frame.

[spylaw4]

Rebadging the L10 would serve no real purpose, despite some of the improvements over the L1. Whether the 510 would re-badge successfuly is a moot point as it seems to be no better noise-wise. Now the E-3 would be a different matter! Maybe Leica are waiting for the rumoured high(er)-end Panasonic?

[robert_parker]

Ultmately, I think Leica stands or falls by the quality of its product - if the R10 is good enough, whatever its specification, then Leica will hold a market share against manufacturers like Canon or Nikon.

 

This may give rise to a need for an alternative DSLR to come in 'under' a high end R10 - perhaps something which builds on the Digilux 2 line, or the Leica CL, would interest many.

 

Ps I also think there is room for a high quality ultra compact, like the C-Lux

[mym6is12]

4/3rds is a technological dead end.

 

Nobody has been able to build a 4/3rds sensor that can even match the performance of a APS chip, let alone APS-H or full frame. It's also probably never going to happen, because the sensor wells are too small to deliver noise free images with good dynamic range.

 

This review seems to indicate the SNR of the E-3 exceeds the Canon 5D at every ISO.

 

http://www.digit.no/wip4/test_v2.epl?cat=478&id=153558&p=4&refresh=&compare_to=61941

 

 

Technology moves on, so the 5DmkII will probably swing the advantage back with more pixels to boot.

[rosuna]

The telecentric design of the lenses could reduce any light transmission losses due to filters and microlenses on conventional sensors, if this loss exists. Problems related to light displacement between pixels would be avoided as well.

 

I think different formats have different sets of strong and weak points. The E-3, for instance, is a wonderful travel and reportage camera. The E410 is a very good compact-like camera. Etc. This format can be a strong competitive player in several segments of the market, and Leica could be able to take advantage of it. The Digilux 3 is maybe too big and expensive (it is sexy, on the other hand). Size and price are two of the most convincing weapons of this format.

 

I suppose the 4/3 format will survive, and Olympus will make a lot of money from it. The lesson of the last years is however this: you must to attack the different segments of the markets with tailored products, specifically designed for them. Canon did it, and the succeeded (APS-C, APS-H and FF cameras, aimed at different applications). Nikon and Sony will do the same. Leica has the opportunity too, with a "pro" line and a "amateur" line. The problem is how to invest in four simultaneous lines of cameras: R, M, 4/3 and compacts. Too much for Leica.

[sdai]

It doesn't matter how good your products are ... at the end of the day, they have to be sold so you can make money, right?

 

How much money do you think Olympus can make from this 4/3 business?

 

E-410, US$405.95

 

E-510, US$495.95

 

When the value of US dollar keeps tanking ...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Angora]

"We're going to catch the competition by surprise! They all think we're going for a bigger sensor than the DMR.... they're wrong! Our secret weapon, which will tell them we haven't just lost the plot, we never knew it existed, is to use a smaller sensor. Bigger is better, so how about this for an advertising strap line: "Move over to Leica R10 - the camera with the bigger crop factor!""

 

Excellent

 

I guess the big factor making the R10 will be the price (let's assume the beast will be FF and not too big as a DMR9/1D/D3 is).

They, at Solms, know that people consider quite seriously the "mixing option": Canon camera + Leica lenses.

[rsolomon]

i think that the camera body function has changed drastically over 20 years, no 10 years ago, at that time camera bodies pretty much: mounted lenses, did metering, fired the flash, and decided how long the shutter should stay open - the film and processing were done later in the lab ...... Camera bodies were more mechanical then today

 

Now camera bodies are basically computers, taking in light and then doing all types of computations to produce and electronic image as it's output.

 

Considering camera bodies are computers shouldn't the price go down as performance goes up, we have all seen this numerous times in the electronic world.

 

leica is competing on their optical ability, they should "focus" on lenses (as they do) and leave the camera bodies to the electical engineers.....