Full Frame Is Here !!!!!!

[terrycioni]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You know what? My M8 is noisier than my MP but it isn't really noisy. It's sensor is smaller than my 5D but I prefer the files and can print them on an 24" wide printer or larger with excellent results.

 

Now the AWB is fixed, I am happy with what I have. Maybe I'd buy a FF version one day, or upgrade to it - but not if it gets a millimetre larger or an ounce heavier. All cameras are compromises and after a year of us all being simultaneously excited and yet still finding lots to complain about, I think the M8 is, for my purposes, the best compromise I have ever used. For now at least, is all the camera I will ever need...

 

T

 

Thanks Tim. All of the upgrade discussion assumes that the M8 needs upgrading and some will believe it needs to be done to keep up, etc. My problem is I am darn happy with what I already have, including the different shutter sound from my film Leicas. That said if the upgrade appeals to you - go for it. I am happy with decent auto white balance and a digital rangefinder I can use with my Leica film lenses.

 

 

Cheers to all. Terry

[Eoin]

...@ Eoin--as for FF, it actually solves the lens selection problem, since my 24 will once again be a 21 Elmarit will once again be a 21 and not a 28 To my mind, it really helps the "where is the fast wide glass" problem on the M8...

 

Therein lies your problem, I've always shot 1.3x factor since I went digital some years ago and to me I've become used to the 28 = 35. However in the event of FF I'm really not looking forward to all the Cyan and vignetting threads along with the corners are not sharp on my 12CV :D.

 

Genuinely, I am happy for you shooters who feel they compromised with the M8 and now are licking their lips at the thought of FF Digital M photography, I don't in one bit begrudge you your nirvana.

[Advertisement]

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

[scott kirkpatrick]

Things that just seem common sense to me:

 

Mr. Lee has said that the next, FF, sensor will be a CCD. Not CMOS. Ergo, not from Sony or Matsushita. So Guy's hint that Kodak is putting out a bigger 35mm chip (they already have shipped a number of MF chips) seems the right path to sniff along. The unpleasant taste of crow is probably preventing any leaks about the very thin dichroic IR filter that Leica plans to install over their FF sensor.

 

The new shutter will have a big enough opening for the FF sensor. It needs a little more space, and the battery box has to be shifted over a bit, too. If I interpreted Mark Norton's teardown correctly, things were just a bit tight on both sides of the imaging chip in the M8. Mark, did you measure when you tore it apart, or can you measure from the pictures? So the first upgrade will involve quite a bit of extraction and re-stuffing.

 

The second upgrade, incorporating the first, or priced separately with a "pain and suffering" discount for the loyal adopters of two separate upgrades, will mean that the cool folks will have their 16MP quiet shutter FF M8's, battered and covered with tape, for about $9K invested over three years, while the doctors and lawyers will be able to buy shiny new M9's in 2009 for about $7K in 2009 dollars. I know which one I want to be.

 

The interesting question is whether the promise of steady revenue and undying loyalty will prevent Mr. Lee and his professional marketers from doing what is normally second nature -- that is crippling and dumbing down the non-leading edge products to create product differentiation while actually only developing a single product. Maybe they will reserve the good IR filter for the M9 and let the M8 still proudly show off its pink lenses.

 

scott

[ptomsu]

FF M - if it comes as a new camera - will be the way I go. Else this would be out some 4-5 years. But I could wait till end 2009 to get my NEW FF M.

[ken_tanaka]

I think that is a very smart move. Sorry, I don't believe for a minute that Leica has realistic plans of any FF sensor M-system camera - or update, because no such sensor would be possible. On Leica R, perhaps. It would be very bad if potential buyers stop buying M8 because they are convinced that a FF-M is around the corner.

 

It was only a few years ago that Leica's former mouthpieces declared that a digital M rangefinder was not possible...even as the RD-1 was in peoples' hands. (Those folks are all now variously occupied elsewhere.)

 

I have no doubts that a full (35 mm) frame rangefinder is, or soon will be, "possible". Others have caught up to Canon's lead. Just this past week, for example, Sony announced its readiness and plans to produce a 22 Mp full-frame sensor. Whether or this, or other new, full-frame sensors will produce worthwhile imaging is yet to be seen.

 

The bigger question in my thoughts is why? More particularly, is this where Leica's development efforts are best invested? From the largely self-referential atmosphere of "marketing" I am sure they believe so. A full-frame M9 is, after all, a far more salable product than a "new and improved" (i.e. finally fixed and finished) M8. But I don't lust for a full-frame M8. I'm actually pretty happy with the M8's frame coverage. I also don't see / hear many (actually, any) good, experienced photographers asking for this, either.

 

But here it comes. So the next obvious question will be whether or not it will be offered as part of that M8 "perpetual upgrade" and shoe-horned into the M8 body. Does anyone believe that? My prediction of that strategy: When chickens grow lips.

[ptomsu]

I also don't see / hear many (actually, any) good, experienced photographers asking for this, either.

 

Who is a good experienced photographer? What is this opinion worth really?

 

What counts for me is that I need it for my purposes, whether I am considered a good photographer or not. I do not even give a sh... on that!

 

I just need and want FF - and I absolutely do no longer care what others think - Period. They can tell their thoughts, of course, but if Leica does not listen to the FF proponents, then they will see themselves where this goes.

 

And I am soooo tired of all experienced and whatever photographers who say or write something - it simply does not necessarily reflect what I need.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK, here's an image of the back of the front of the camera with the shutter and sensor removed.

 

Half of the battery holder and the black lens throat surround are a single moulding. To the immediate right is part of the folder light meter circuitry and to the right of it is the space occupied by the shutter mechanics. The brass stud and circlip is the back of the lens release button. Moving right, we have the infamous Shutter Lock which creates some of the noise; through the gray diagonal lever, it prevents the shutter releasing when it is not supposed to. Finally, at the right you have the shutter motor wind and gearbox, you can see the small domed flywheel and the electronics surrounding it.

 

Keeping in mind the length of the body is about 135mm, maybe someone (I've got to run to the theatre) could take this and superimpose a scaled 24 * 36mm rectangular line centred horizontally on the roller at the top and vertically on the lens release button. The image is tilted slightly back, so if it could be squared off, we'd have a reasonable impression of what's got to move to make space for the FF sensor.

 

Interesting that the folded light meter circuit sits between the lens throat and the shutter mechanicals. If you imagine the shutter in place, you can see that this might even obscure past of the existing shutter opening.

 

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!

 

[guy]

OH BOY OH BOY OH BOY OH BOY OH BOY....

 

Seriously, this is super news. This is the kind of upgrade I'd be interested in. And wouldn't it be cool if as well as being full frame, that new sensor could handle high ISOs really nicely? For me, that's more of a sale point than the FF, since all my lenses are geared to the crop factor.

 

Either way, though, this just made my day. The only downside to Leica is that the £900 I have saved towards a 35mm lux is now going to sit under the mattress a while longer in the hopes that this all pans out properly...

[scott kirkpatrick]

Thanks, Mark. I get 34 mm between the battery case and the opposite edge of the lens box. That's using 140mm as the width of the camera. I think the battery box needs a shave. I wonder if the first update will do that.

 

scott

[innerimager]

If someone has said this already, I apologize. But one important virtue of FF is that high Iso noise is much easier to manage because of the increased pixel size. The D3 is the shining example of this, as well as the 5D. If it means something like a 2 stop advantage in Iso noise, all things (# pixels at least) otherwise being equal, this would be a deciding factor in our use of the camera for low light imaging. best...Peter

[sdai]

Keeping in mind the length of the body is about 135mm, maybe someone (I've got to run to the theatre) could take this and superimpose a scaled 24 * 36mm rectangular line centred horizontally on the roller at the top and vertically on the lens release button.

 

Mark, now it's almost like 1:1 ... the superimposed area in blue measures 24x36mm

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!

[Olsen]

It was only a few years ago that Leica's former mouthpieces declared that a digital M rangefinder was not possible...even as the RD-1 was in peoples' hands. (Those folks are all now variously occupied elsewhere.)

 

I have no doubts that a full (35 mm) frame rangefinder is, or soon will be, "possible". Others have caught up to Canon's lead. Just this past week, for example, Sony announced its readiness and plans to produce a 22 Mp full-frame sensor. Whether or this, or other new, full-frame sensors will produce worthwhile imaging is yet to be seen.

 

The bigger question in my thoughts is why? More particularly, is this where Leica's development efforts are best invested? From the largely self-referential atmosphere of "marketing" I am sure they believe so. A full-frame M9 is, after all, a far more salable product than a "new and improved" (i.e. finally fixed and finished) M8. But I don't lust for a full-frame M8. I'm actually pretty happy with the M8's frame coverage. I also don't see / hear many (actually, any) good, experienced photographers asking for this, either.

 

But here it comes. So the next obvious question will be whether or not it will be offered as part of that M8 "perpetual upgrade" and shoe-horned into the M8 body. Does anyone believe that? My prediction of that strategy: When chickens grow lips.

 

Sure, after Canon launched it's 1Ds back in 2002 several other sensor producers, like Sony and Kodak, have launched similar sensors. They function well on DSLR-cameras were the distance between rear lense element and sensor is larger. But they function well, only just. Very important: Both Canon and Nikon are about to introduce fast & wide lenses to better suit these sensors. Full frame sensors functions only just on DSLR cameras.

 

On a rangefinder camera with much shorter distance between rear lense element and sensor the light rays hit the corners of a full frame sensor with too steep an angle. Light does not hit the bottom of the pixel wells with vignetting as a result.

 

It could well be that a FF-M will be a reality one day. But not any time soon.

[mjh]

The new shutter will have a big enough opening for the FF sensor.

So does the old shutter. Judging from Mark’s photographs, it’s a standard 35 mm shutter.

 

It needs a little more space, and the battery box has to be shifted over a bit, too. If I interpreted Mark Norton's teardown correctly, things were just a bit tight on both sides of the imaging chip in the M8.

Yep, something needs to give way. Still, I believe that if a sensor upgrade should be viable (and I think it will be, provided that a 36 x 24 mm sensor in an M-type camera is possible at all), it should also be possible to upgrade an M8 Mark I. I don’t see the new shutter as a prerequisite for the sensor upgrade.

[grduprey]

Sounds a lot of fun at this year's Kina ... at least 3 companies will launch their next generation flagship cameras. Who else is going? I want to book my flight tomorrow.

 

Lots of good stuff to see, folks ... besides the Leicas, there should be the Zeiss 16-35/2.8 for Sony as well.

 

I will be there, my ticket has already been purchased, leaving 9th of August. Of course, I'm going to other places also... Germany, Poland, Italy, Spain, France, Sweden, and what ever else i can fit into 3 months.

 

Gene

[mjh]

On a rangefinder camera with much shorter distance between rear lense element and sensor the light rays hit the corners of a full frame sensor with too steep an angle. Light does not hit the bottom of the pixel wells with vignetting as a result.

Indeed. The big question is how Leica will manage to overcome the inherent problems in fitting a 36 x 24 mm sensor on a rangefinder camera. Once these problems are solved, fitting the new sensor into an existing M8 should be piece of cake.

[marknorton]

I'm there, first day, flight booked. Such is the lunacy of air fares these days, it cost (London-Cologne return) about the same as a Leica lens cap or maybe two...

[waterlenz]

Mark, is the first picture in post 67 flipped L-R? The glass on top (my point of reference) looks more like the viewfinder front than the eyepiece.

The battery is position towards the lens (look at bottom of M8 with plate removed). They may be able to accommodate FF by tapering the 'throat' - may exclude use on a viso w/o vignetting since lenses would have to have exit pupils near the camera lens mount.

Tom

[grduprey]

I'm there, first day, flight booked. Such is the lunacy of air fares these days, it cost (London-Cologne return) about the same as a Leica lens cap or maybe two...

 

 

Maybe I'll see you there Mark. The trip is not costing me a dime, as I'm using my airline miles. ;-) Also staying with our former Exchange Daughters families homes, so no hotel costs either. ;-) So just food and transportation between exchange daughters homes etc. One lives just outside of Cologne.

 

Gene

[guy]

On a rangefinder camera with much shorter distance between rear lense element and sensor the light rays hit the corners of a full frame sensor with too steep an angle. Light does not hit the bottom of the pixel wells with vignetting as a result.

 

It could well be that a FF-M will be a reality one day. But not any time soon.

 

The rumours seem to be pointing to a Kodak CCD as the sensor. Kodak's website has this to say of their current crop (no pun!) of FF CCDs:

 

 

Ultra-high resolution

Support for large sensor formats

Simple, two-phase clocking

Wide range of pixel sizes

Ultra low dark current for long exposures

High frame rates

Vertical and horizontal binning

Options include anti-blooming support, microlens availability, and color or monochrome selection

 

...of which the interesting point is "microlens availability", which is how Leica mitigated the inherent problems of a sensor in a rangefinder in the first place. So fingers crossed they pull a really big technological rabbit out of the hat...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[fotografr]

 

The bigger question in my thoughts is why? More particularly, is this where Leica's development efforts are best invested? From the largely self-referential atmosphere of "marketing" I am sure they believe so. A full-frame M9 is, after all, a far more salable product than a "new and improved" (i.e. finally fixed and finished) M8. But I don't lust for a full-frame M8. I'm actually pretty happy with the M8's frame coverage. I also don't see / hear many (actually, any) good, experienced photographers asking for this, either.

 

I'm basically in agreement with you on this. The only thing that would make me favor a FF sensor is better image quality. I've completely adjusted to the lens coverage of the M8 sensor and don't feel the need to go ultra wide, which is primarily where the impact of a smaller sensor is felt.