Full Frame Is Here !!!!!!

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why, exactly, do you feel you so desperately need a full-frame rangefinder camera? Can you display examples of your photography that illustrates the consequences of such a severe deficit?

 

Yes--I can. But not on the M8, because I have to switch to a Canon 5d to get the shot.

 

I'm indoors shooting a wedding party of 20 indoors. There's only so much room between me and the wedding party, and the light source is fabulous. There is no time to set up lights in a darker, more spacious part of the building, My back is literally against a wall as I compose the shot, which I can't do with my 21 Elmarit.

 

Why? Because my 21mm Elmarit is a 28 Elmarit on the M8. The 15 CV--around 20mm--I have is too slow for the light.

 

The solution? Switch to an OM 21 f2 mounted or a 24 1.4L on my full frame 5d. They're not that sharp wide open, but they're both doable stopped down a little bit.

 

There are all kinds of problems with the current crop at the wide end.

 

So enough; I want my 28 Cron to be a 28; I want my 35 lux to be a 35.

 

Is that enough of a reason?

[Guest stnami]

Jamie it's a traditional Japanese bear I think, I usually scour old and new window shops where ever I travel to, heaps of quirky people in this world

[Advertisement]

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

[canlogic]

Yes--I can. But not on the M8, because I have to switch to a Canon 5d to get the shot.

 

I'm indoors shooting a wedding party of 20 indoors. There's only so much room between me and the wedding party, and the light source is fabulous. There is no time to set up lights in a darker, more spacious part of the building, My back is literally against a wall as I compose the shot, which I can't do with my 21 Elmarit.

 

Why? Because my 21mm Elmarit is a 28 Elmarit on the M8. The 15 CV--around 20mm--I have is too slow for the light.

 

The solution? Switch to an OM 21 f2 mounted or a 24 1.4L on my full frame 5d. They're not that sharp wide open, but they're both doable stopped down a little bit.

 

There are all kinds of problems with the current crop at the wide end.

 

So enough; I want my 28 Cron to be a 28; I want my 35 lux to be a 35.

 

Is that enough of a reason?

 

I have had the same problem myself. At a wedding I did this past summer the room was sort of 2 rooms joined to gether, the ceiling of one part was fairly low about 2 feet lower that the 2nd part. I had to do a group shot where the only part big enough was the low ceiling part. I had to use my 5D to get the shot where if my M8 had been full frame my wides would have been wide enough. even with the 5D the lighting was horrible to set up.

[jrc]

<snip>

I'm indoors shooting a wedding party of 20 indoors. There's only so much room between me and the wedding party, and the light source is fabulous. There is no time to set up lights in a darker, more spacious part of the building, My back is literally against a wall as I compose the shot, which I can't do with my 21 Elmarit. Why? Because my 21mm Elmarit is a 28 Elmarit on the M8. The 15 CV--around 20mm--I have is too slow for the light. <snip>So enough; I want my 28 Cron to be a 28; I want my 35 lux to be a 35.

Is that enough of a reason?

 

Jamie,

No offense, but while it's enough of a reason for you to find a different solution than Leica, I'm not sure it's enough of a reason for Leica to go full-frame. If Leica could solve the noise problem and get a relatively clean 1600 with ~16mp, I think most people would be happy with the 1.33. The real problem with 1.33 is not the wide-angle lenses, it's the other constraints it imposes: smaller light wells for given pixel counts, the resulting trade-off between noise and resolution, etc. If those problems could be solved, for the rest of us, I think the exact sensor size becomes somewhat (not entirely) irrelevant. To tell the truth, the use of an M8 to shoot weddings strikes me as a little eccentric, given the other choices available, like the 5D and the D3, which offer autofocus, better low-light qualities, high burst rates, sophisticated flash, face-tracking, live-view, precise framing, and better reliability.

 

JC

[carstenw]

I also have a strong preference for FF sensors, although like most people, I cannot say that I *need* it. However, John, keep in mind that getting decent high ISO performance is a lot easier on a FF sensor than on a crop sensor, due to pixel size. It is no coincidence that the best high ISO performers are FF (5D, and now D3). As well as FF, I also want ISO starting at 100, or even better, 50, and going to a relatively clean ISO 1600. I am sure that all this is doable within a year or so. The technology seems to be hitting a place where this kind of perfomance is not only attainable, but also somewhat standard. The FF market is still a bit niche, but I want it. My Dual-Range Summicron wants to be a 50, and I have no alternative lens for this. My 75 Lux does not like being a 100mm effective lens. My WATE's widest angle has me eyeing a CV12. Give me FF!

[lct]

...the real problem with 1.33 is not the wide-angle lenses...

Not my opinion i must say. How do you manage to get mere 21mm FoV pics at f/2.8 with a cropped camera? Using a monster like the Zeiss 15/2.8? I like much APS digicams personally but they have limits and the more obvious one to me is the impossibility to use wides normally.

[Jack MacDonough]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Higher ISO with lower noise is more important for me than FF. But I am looking for a second M8 now, and I will wait for a full frame before I buy, as I want my WATE to be truely 16. I haven't sold my 21 2.8 on the asumption that a FF will appear. Then the M8 becomes the backup as well as second camera mounted with a different lens. A future M FF with a WATE and my 1.3 M8 with it's 75 and I can do just fine.

[okram]

Jamie,

No offense, but while it's enough of a reason for you to find a different solution than Leica, I'm not sure it's enough of a reason for Leica to go full-frame. If Leica could solve the noise problem and get a relatively clean 1600 with ~16mp, I think most people would be happy with the 1.33. The real problem with 1.33 is not the wide-angle lenses, it's the other constraints it imposes: smaller light wells for given pixel counts, the resulting trade-off between noise and resolution, etc. If those problems could be solved, for the rest of us, I think the exact sensor size becomes somewhat (not entirely) irrelevant. To tell the truth, the use of an M8 to shoot weddings strikes me as a little eccentric, given the other choices available, like the 5D and the D3, which offer autofocus, better low-light qualities, high burst rates, sophisticated flash, face-tracking, live-view, precise framing, and better reliability.

 

JC

 

You can always crop.

Or whatever...

[Kent10D]

Jamie it's a traditional Japanese bear I think, I usually scour old and new window shops where ever I travel to, heaps of quirky people in this world

 

Imants & Jamie,

 

The cool little creature is a "tanuki," or racoon dog. Some interesting folklore surrounding these guys. There's even a Wikipedia entry ...

 

Tanuki - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[waterlenz]

Tom, no the image is correct, it's looking at the back of the front casting making up the camera.

 

Thanks Mark!

[waterlenz]

B Once you've had a Nikon D3 for a few weeks, the level of noise at ISO 1250 and up in the M8 is simply unacceptable.

 

It would be wonderful if the FF M8 had a 12MP sensor with the same high ISO performance as the D3!

[ho_co]

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. ... It would be very bad if potential buyers stop buying M8 because they are convinced that a FF-M is around the corner.

Lee must have considered this before the FAQ and his remarks were published. The M8 must be upgradable to fullframe.

 

If the new shutter is not absolutely necessary, it indicates to me that they will bring out an M9 with a modified body/viewfinder, battery etc., or alternatively there is something wrong with the present shutter.

I also thought along those lines, but I don't think it necessarily follows. Could just be two upgrade paths: Maybe some want the quieter shutter and take upgrade #1. Others may want full frame and take only upgrade #2. Some may want both. We've heard a lot of people asking for a quieter camera, a sizable number worrying about damaging the LCD, but very few complaining of shutter deterioration.

 

Maybe they will reserve the good IR filter for the M9 and let the M8 still proudly show off its pink lenses.

Scott, Leica hasn't traditionally produced mid-grade and high-end equipment. I think the M8 IS the M9 everyone has speculated about. That is, we will simply be offered upgrades until something *very* different comes out, which will be the successor to the M8 and doubtless be called the M9.

 

... procuring a suitable sensor should be the easiest task.... Overcoming the obstacle of the short flange distance is the really difficult part.

I know Leica wants to enable use of all lenses, but they are already making design changes with the advent of digital. They've been moving more toward retrofocal designs since the M5. The WATE is fairly telecentric, and aren't the Summarits a further move in this direction? Firmware works today along with de-centered collector lenses. Couldn't the process simply be extended on a FF sensor? It would be nice if the IR filtration could be behind the lens, but we may have to keep wearing our pink finery for a while.

 

No it doesn't mean that at all. The current sensor is CCD and is manufactured by Kodak.

Thanks, Woody. I just got confused on CMOS vs CCD.

 

...(a Nikon 5D killer)...

I agree. Let's wipe out those Nikon 5D's.

 

--HC

[Guest stnami]

Thanks Kent, makes it even more interesting ............. he's a bit thin for his role as the modern day God of Gluttony, Boozing, and Restauranteurs

[sdai]

If anyone has seen a working solution for a 27.8 mm flange distance, than obviously he’s not talking. The M8 with its x1.33 sensor was a major feat already; a 36 x 24 mm version would be something else entirely.

 

If the pellicle mirror rumor for R is true, then they must have found a way to gather (much) more light on the sensor dramatically. There can be better microlens structure and layout to boost the sensor's peak efficiency too.

 

I'm thinking ... people are gladly using the IR cut filter on wide angle lenses, right? Now, Leica will take this away and address it properly in camera and recommend to add a (dedicated, Leica branded of course) center filter on each wide angle lens instead, 6 bit will tell the camera what it is right? then it becomes easy, let M9 handle the rest.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}To tell the truth, the use of an M8 to shoot weddings strikes me as a little eccentric, given the other choices available, like the 5D and the D3, which offer autofocus, better low-light qualities, high burst rates, sophisticated flash, face-tracking, live-view, precise framing, and better reliability.

 

Well, you would think so, wouldn't you? Reading this forum lately, you would think I'd be crazy to use an M digital for pro use, and especially events, right?

 

 

Which is why before going Leica almost completely, I have had essentially the whole raft of Canon digicams from D60 and 1ds to 1d2, 1ds2 and now 5d.

 

But you know what? Despite the conventional wisdom, it turns out that with the M8 (and DMR, too) I have

• less trouble focusing in low light than any of the Canons, none of whose lenses or screens are made for manual focus, and none of which focus in the marginal light that happens at most weddings
  
• no need for 8fps burst rates (I'm waiting for the right moment, not covering all the moments)
  
• the sophisticated Canon and Metz flashes I use in M mode anyway with radio slaves (and they work perfectly with the M8)
  
• no need for "face tracking" and I shudder to think what that may be (it's not on any Canon I've ever owned)
  
• better wide angle correction with Leica glass than any Canon made (which I'd rather have than absolutely precise framing)
  
• reliability on the DMR and M8 through 10s of thousands of shots, beyond the Canon equipment, which, by the way, has some of the poorest manufacturing of pro glass made today--even with their great optical designs.

So that needs to be said, even if it's a little off topic: it turns out that the M8 is nearly a perfect event coverage camera. And as a rangefinder, it's appreciably more stealthy, smaller and (I find) much more ergonomically pleasant to shoot with for 10 - 12 hours at a time.

 

Who would have thought? Well, except, of course, all those people who've covered events with M cameras over the last, oh, how many decades?

 

 

YMMV, of course. What I need is for the wide glass to be wide glass, plain and simple. Right now, with the 1.3 crop, the widest fastest Leica glass is the 28 Cron, which is a 35 FOV lens.

 

That's too narrow a FOV, and if we're talking Lux // 1.4s, then we're almost at a 50 FOV.

 

I'll say this once more; I like my 35 1.4L Canon lens, but it's no 35 Lux. I think most M8 users, if they need fast wide glass, would agree with me on this.

[Jamie Roberts]

Thanks Kent, makes it even more interesting ............. he's a bit thin for his role as the modern day God of Gluttony, Boozing, and Restauranteurs

 

Yes, thanks Kent (and thanks Imants again for the image )!

[marknorton]

Jamie, I think it's Sony who've introduced a feature which fires the shutter when someone in the frame smiles, I'm sure that feature could come in really useful for you, what with weddings being such a joyous occasion and all... "I'm sorry your wedding pictures got screwed up, you weren't looking happy enough".

 

I agree with you about FF. It's been a revelation to me to use my Nikon 28mm f1.4 on a D3 - 42mm on their cropped cameras - and the same would be true for the 35mm Summilux and 28mm Summicron, and just think of the coverage of a WATE. Truth is, we already have access to fast wide-angle glass, it's just all that rendered image outside the frame going to waste. If you believe Leica's position that lenses like a 28mm Summilux or 21mm Summicron would be large, difficult and expensive to make, FF is the alternative we need.

[Jamie Roberts]

Jamie, I think it's Sony who've introduced a feature which fires the shutter when someone in the frame smiles, I'm sure that feature could come in really useful for you, what with weddings being such a joyous occasion and all... "I'm sorry your wedding pictures got screwed up, you weren't looking happy enough".

 

I agree with you about FF. It's been a revelation to me to use my Nikon 28mm f1.4 on a D3 - 42mm on their cropped cameras - and the same would be true for the 35mm Summilux and 28mm Summicron, and just think of the coverage of a WATE. Truth is, we already have access to fast wide-angle glass, it's just all that rendered image outside the frame going to waste. If you believe Leica's position that lenses like a 28mm Summilux or 21mm Summicron would be large, difficult and expensive to make, FF is the alternative we need.

 

Amen!

 

It's funny how you "don't miss" FF until you have it again

 

Ever since the 1d2 I swore I would not go back beyond a 1.3 crop, and getting the 1ds2 / 5d was a joy, even as it made me move towards putting Leica R glass on the Canons since a lot of the Canon stuff was not up to 16mp ff scrutiny!

 

But I hear that 28 1.4 Nikon is something else

 

As for face tracking, I just read where GE has introduced a "blink alert" indicator to tell you (after-the-fact) if someone blinked during the shot! LOL!!

[ho_co]

Jamie, I think it's Sony who've introduced a feature which fires the shutter when someone in the frame smiles...

Not only Sony. Saw an article in the past month or so, can't find it now. Some California company came up with the idea as I recall. Now everyone in the mass market is climbing all over it.

 

Same company has come up with an auto self timer--not for you, Jamie, of course. It waits until the photographer joins the group, then waits for a smile, then shoots.

 

(You just thought this forum was crazy!)

 

 

I just read where GE has introduced a "blink alert" indicator to tell you (after-the-fact) if someone blinked during the shot! LOL!!

Well, of course!

 

I mean, the studio photographer of the future will be in the office looking at six video screens and firing six tethered cameras. He needs an attention attractor so they can raise it to twelve cameras under his control.

 

--HC

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I don't think Leica will ever put a sensor in there camera's coming from anyone that has it in there's or more aptly said there will never be a Sony, Nikon, Canon sensor in a Leica body and there choices are only two companies that are independent Dalsa and Kodak and leica has a history obviously with Kodak.