If we all like Leica R glass so much...

[Iron Flatline]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...why do we care so adamantly that Leica make an R10? Or the S2? Or whatever? Isn't the body a lot less important these days than it's ever been? Why not just encourage Leica to make lenses for other mounts, just like Zeiss does?

[Advertisement]

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

[robsteve]

You obvioulsy haven't tried a DMR:)

[Iron Flatline]

No, I really haven't...am I wondering if my hopeful fever-pitched dreams for an R10 are misplaced. Might the lenses be good enough? I find my Canon 5D lacking in elegance (and my 1Ds even more so) but they work fine for capturing images....

[ijporter]

Do you mean to say that there is no difference between what my R6 body does and what the R10 body will do? Have I been deceived into thinking that the sensor, processor, firmware (and all the other electronic wizardry in today's digital bodies) have significant roles in determining the picture quality? Have I been conned into thinking that a Leica lens on a Canon sensor will produce different results than one on a DMR or Panasonic?

 

Lawyers - prepare for a class action against these con-men!!

 

But I'd like someone else to pay the legal fees when I lose the case.

 

Ian

[sdai]

Only a camera could give life to the lens, especially the ones like a DMR, or the M8.

 

Without a camera, Leica would lose its soul. Take a look at Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron ... who cares what they do?

[robsteve]

No, I really haven't...am I wondering if my hopeful fever-pitched dreams for an R10 are misplaced. Might the lenses be good enough? I find my Canon 5D lacking in elegance (and my 1Ds even more so) but they work fine for capturing images....

 

 

I guess what I was trying to say is that Leica brought to the Digital capture some of the things that make Leica's lenses different from the rest. The images from the DMR or M8 just look better than those from the other digital cameras, even if those other digitals are using the same Leica lens.

 

This little Leica extra they added to the DMR or M8 is why we are hoping for a R10 eventually.

Robert

[sdai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My guess is that it is exactly due to the lack of in camera processing.

 

The DMR/M8 files are as "raw"/good as they can be, the latitude for post processing is simply amazing. No other camera raws can withstand the amount of torture the DMR and M8 files are going to take.

[wildlightphoto]

I guess what I was trying to say is that Leica brought to the Digital capture some of the things that make Leica's lenses different from the rest. The images from the DMR or M8 just look better than those from the other digital cameras, even if those other digitals are using the same Leica lens.

 

This little Leica extra they added to the DMR or M8 is why we are hoping for a R10 eventually.

Robert

 

What Robert wrote... Canons with Leica glass produce fine results until you compare their RAW files with an M8 or DMR DNG file.

[Iron Flatline]

Do you mean to say that there is no difference between what my R6 body does and what the R10 body will do? Have I been deceived into thinking that the sensor, processor, firmware (and all the other electronic wizardry in today's digital bodies) have significant roles in determining the picture quality? Have I been conned into thinking that a Leica lens on a Canon sensor will produce different results than one on a DMR or Panasonic?

I guess I lack the skill to parse which part is sarcastic, and which isn't.

 

But yes, to a certain degree I am saying exactly that - Leica makes great glass, they don't make sensors. All that firmware stuff is a little overrated. We capture RAW, and then process our files as we see fit. All the high-end cameras now have very good sensors, and I'm not convinced Leica's sensor is any better than the Canon 1Ds, the Nikon D3, or the Sony A900... or whatever else is out there.

 

I have an M8, and I like the elegance of it. The simplicity. I would like an SLR like that, too -just simple controls. But if we're talking about sensors and shutters vs. lenses, I feel 75% or more of the burden for a good digital image falls on the lenses these days.

 

Why should Leica go near bancruptcy to eek out a second-rate dSLR when what we really want is good glass. The company is going to buy their sensors - and a lot of the related firmware programming - from a third party anyway....

 

I'm really asking an honest question here - this is in no way intended as trolling. On one hand, I'm hoping Leica will announce a really cool R10 (or S2 or whatever) next week, but if don't... is there another way to get there?

 

Is this is such a big deal?

[Iron Flatline]

What Robert wrote... Canons with Leica glass produce fine results until you compare their RAW files with an M8 or DMR DNG file.

But why? Is that due to the Kodak sensor, or is that something uniquely Leica?

[robsteve]

But why? Is that due to the Kodak sensor, or is that something uniquely Leica?

 

It probably has to do with the choices Leica makes in designing the camera. A combination of many things including the sensor.

 

Robert

[wildlightphoto]

The company is going to buy their sensors - and a lot of the related firmware programming - from a third party anyway....

 

The third parties they're buying sensors and expertise from are industry leaders.

[mooky]

This current topic is a joke, right?

Why should Leica go into bankruptcy making a second-rate DSLR??? Huh? Where do these ideas come from. Seriously? You've got to be joking.

 

If the body doesn't mean anything, why do you own an M8? Why does it seem that such ideas always end up with a Canon in the sentence? What makes you think that Leica will come out with a second rate camera? Doesn't second rate quality mean the new today, old tomorrow Canons? (Yes, I have used Nikons and Canons and others)

 

All the Leica R (and M) glass through the years have their own unique look, generation to generation. Look up Ernst Haas' book, "In Germany", (ernst-haas.com) he used Leicaflex SL's and the early R glass and the colors, contrast and sharpness look great. I hope that whatever is coming will allow whatever R glass we own to be used. I don't want a camera that has a bunch of buttons to distract me and I don't want to do a bunch of 'post processing'. I want to continue to shoot with the idea that when I release the shutter, I've done the very best I can to capture the final image. A Leica body, either R or M, with it's glass is a complete visual and tool has always encouraged that. To me, that is the difference.

[Iron Flatline]

Oh, unclench mooky, your attention deficit is showing, and it's unbecoming. Read the whole thread. To answer just one part (again): I own an M because it is elegant and simple, and that is why I hope Leica also makes an R.

 

For the more mature members and capable readers:

 

Let me phrase the question differently: we used to load our M6s (in my case) or whatever else with different kinds of film, and now a lot of us expend considerable effort (and software fees) emulating a certain look. Tri-X or X-Pan were never a Leica technology though.

 

So in the sense of pure image creation - divorcing the photographer from the process for a second, and just passing light to the plane - it was really about the glass, and the shutter. Back to reality, of course the controls of a camera greatly affect how a photographer works with his tool, so to disregard them is impossible - hence my continued hope for an R10.

 

So mooky, when I say "second rate" I mean that in the way a typical feature-freak out there in the consumer landscape might perceive a camera that doesn't have all the bells-and-whistles. Sorry I shorthanded that, I should probably be more elaborate int this case. Realistically we'd all be happy with a camera that just takes our R glasses - probably without AF, nevermind me-too niche features like capturing video or a print-now button.

 

If the sensor is Kodak or Dalsa or Sony or whatever, what other influence does Leica have beyond the glass? Or have I answered my own question when I talk about the controls and the way a photographer works with his/her camera?

[jquimby]

I think the basic answer to your question was up a few responses, that is, it is the decisions that go in to the camera is what sets a Leica camera body apart from the field.

 

Specifically, it is how they record the raw data, how the information is stored, use or lack of an AA filter, the type of sensor they decide to use and its individual 'thumb print'. After many combinations of trial and error, they come up with a solution that is uniquely theirs.

 

That is the beginning of what separates a DMR or M8 from a Canon 5D, etc... More so than any number of buttons or add-on features. When you add on a Leica lens to a Leica body it is a continuation of the the same process, the same goal, the same design philosophy, the same execution. Uniquely Leica.

 

Canon, Nikon, Zeiss, etc, have different goals. A camera that is to be mass produced must make certain design decisions to meet its goal, that is mass assembly. Compromises must be made in order to achieve that goal, that does show in the even if it is subtle.

 

This isn't a right or wrong, just what is the end goal, for Leica it is one goal for others it is another goal...

 

 

Long story short, Leica attempts to apply the same principles in building a body as it does with a lens. Whether they succeed or not isn't relevant to what you are asking, but when they succeed, say in the case of the DMR or the M8, then the end results is a combination of both unique parts coming together. You can't change one of the parts and expect the same result... That is at least my take on it.

 

cheers.

-joe

[stuny]

Iron -

 

I see the issue as two-fold: part you have mentioned, and part Joe has mentioned. Regarding your part, I too greatly prefer the simple, non-button, non-menu controls of the DMR and the D2 vs. the Nikons and Canons I've tried. I also value an innovation many decades old: automatic diaphragm so that I can compose and meter without stopping down, not possible with an R lens on a Canon.

 

Then as Joe mentions, there are a large number of technical decisions the designers make – there may be millions of permutations. We both like the results of those decisions in the DMR and M8.

 

So yes, even with RAW files, there are a number of decisions impacting the final gestalt of the camera, and the controls are simple. I hope the R10 will become real.

[Iron Flatline]

Thanks everyone, it confirms to me a lot of what I thought. I appreciate that you took the time for me to think through this.

 

I hope we get an R10. I have read all the speculation about the S2, but for selfish reasons I hope it looks like an SLR I can hand-hold, not a big MF that will sit on a tripod.

[mooky]

Hey Iron, could you explain that again? I need more time to 'think through this'.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[razerx]

If the M9 has live view then all R lenses would work on it.

[Iron Flatline]

If the M9 has live view then all R lenses would work on it.

You lost me on this one...