Reason(s) for a FF M9

[badpets]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After I mounted my Noctilux on my M3 body, it feels really good to see 50mm performing at its true focal length which is 50mm. It makes me don't want to put Noctilux back to the M8. So I totally can see how lovely would a FF M9 be for me!

 

I know many of you also want a full frame version of M8.

What is the particular reason(s) for you?

[andit]

I understand your thinking about a full frame M. However, according to reports, due to the construction of the sensors and the way in which a rangefinder camera works, this is virtually impossible with current technology. It has to do with the angle that light hits the sensor, and the deep well construction of current imaging sensors.

 

So what I'm saying is that one should rather be happy to be able to use a digital rangefinder and have the possibility to using M glass. I'm pretty sure that when technology makes that next step, we will see a FF M camera - it might just take a couple of years.

 

Andreas

[Advertisement]

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

[badpets]

thx andrea for shelding light on that. that'll be too sad

[Guest PhotoWebb.co.uk]

In the recent article in LFI Leica were quoted as saying that if a full frame M is what the market wants then that is what the market will get.

 

It will happen but we might be waiting a while!

[erl]

Forget the number engraved on the front and side of your lens and just use it on the body in your hands to perform the way it does on that body. Learn to think visually rather than numerically. It simplifies life and delivers images as visualized regardless of the focal length as 'numerized'.

[KM-25]

Forget the number engraved on the front and side of your lens and just use it on the body in your hands to perform the way it does on that body. Learn to think visually rather than numerically. It simplifies life and delivers images as visualized regardless of the focal length as 'numerized'.

 

Mmmm...

 

I don't buy this. Every lens has a distinct signature that drapes the shape of out of focus areas across the frame. In some cases, like the Noctilux, it changes shape and becomes a distinct feature of the look. I call it "Peripheral Bokeh".

 

When you crop that out, you take away part of that signature and the shots, well, they look cropped. So it is not a numerical thing, it is a lens signature thing, it happens with all lenses, regardless of brand or mount type.

 

So when one pays many thousands of dollars for Leica glass only to have it constantly cropped, well...that may or may not sit well with the individual user.

 

It never did with me, so I insisted on full frame.

 

The M8, however, was the only game in town when I got it, so I lived with it, but did not at all like my 35 lux cropped to nearly a 50. It just sterilized the look to me. So for that reason and a few others, the 8 and I parted ways.

 

That is my take on it, every one else's may vary...

[JWW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought my Noctilux for my M8 so I didn't have a basis for comparison for or against FF but on the M8 the Nocti is great on its own merits as a short tele. It sure seems the popularity and price of the Noctilux went way up after the intro of the M8 so there may be other fans of this lens on an M8 even if cropped.

[erl]

KM-25, I accept your feeling and expression. I suppose what I am trying to say is that since it is now different, take what it is and use it for what it is and accept what it delivers.

 

For me, the Noctilux is now a different tool. On my M6 & M7 it was an f1.0/50mm I chose it for the f1.0 factor, not the focal length. Now it is an f1.0/60 something mm lens. I do shoot somewhat differently with it now, but what if I had never had a an M6 or M7? I would not know the difference. So which is better? Knowing the difference, or not?

 

A wise man once said, and I often repeat it; "everything is relative!"

The Guyuto Monks say; "nothing is forever".

So, I move on whether I like it or not.

 

Apologies for so much philosophy. It's late here.

[lct]

...I know many of you also want a full frame version of M8.

What is the particular reason(s) for you?

I don't want another version of the M8 sorry but i'd like to have a FF digital M for sure. Simple reason is FF DoF. Now i can live with crop cameras as well but i prefer APS-C to APS-H.

[badpets]

but the thing is Noctilux was designed for a 50mm focal length. You don't see a 35mm or 75mm with aperture as low as 1. if M8 existed before Noctilux, then Leica would have designed Noctilux differently. but still, the new noctilux .95 is still designed according to the standard of FF. i wish i didn't know the difference between leica and other makers so i would have chosen to buy cheaper cameras and saved big bucks. after all, i think erl, you have a positive thinking which is good in a way.

 

 

K

but what if I had never had a an M6 or M7? I would not know the difference. So which is better? Knowing the difference, or not?

[Bo_Lorentzen]

LOL BadPets,

 

its all teory. For now we have M8 if we want digital, but I put a lot of film through my M6 because of the exact reason you mention, there IS a different look to the lens on a FF camera.

 

But I take joy from one particular fact.... have you noticed that all new Leica lenses is designed for FF, not a single "M8 digital only" lens, such as a the logical ultra fast 35mm.. Nikon made ASP only lenses in Nikon mount.. they work but only render part of my film nikon.. The fact that Leica have not done any of this is also promising a FF M camera. and maybe even I can take the IR filters back off.

 

Happy shooting.

[andit]

But I take joy from one particular fact.... have you noticed that all new Leica lenses is designed for FF, not a single "M8 digital only" lens, such as a the logical ultra fast 35mm.. Nikon made ASP only lenses in Nikon mount.. they work but only render part of my film nikon.. The fact that Leica have not done any of this is also promising a FF M camera. and maybe even I can take the IR filters back off.

 

Hi Bo,

 

I agree absolutely with you. Canon also has these hideous EF-S lenses which can not be used on full frame or 35mm. Makes you think that the manufacturers actually do not want to produce full frame - certainly not for the masses.

 

Andreas

[badpets]

so M8 will eventually become a transiting product as from analog to digital for leica. i believe there will be a full frame M9. just hope it will not turn out as big as M5.

 

LOL BadPets,

 

its all teory. For now we have M8 if we want digital, but I put a lot of film through my M6 because of the exact reason you mention, there IS a different look to the lens on a FF camera.

 

But I take joy from one particular fact.... have you noticed that all new Leica lenses is designed for FF, not a single "M8 digital only" lens, such as a the logical ultra fast 35mm.. Nikon made ASP only lenses in Nikon mount.. they work but only render part of my film nikon.. The fact that Leica have not done any of this is also promising a FF M camera. and maybe even I can take the IR filters back off.

 

Happy shooting.

[jaapv]

Any current product is a transit to a future one. Let's enjoy the process....

[KM-25]

But I take joy from one particular fact.... have you noticed that all new Leica lenses is designed for FF, not a single "M8 digital only" lens, such as a the logical ultra fast 35mm.

 

The day I was told of these lenses some 6 months before their announcement, I was relieved. I knew that Leica was commited to total system integration, which makes sense. After all, these are not $900 Nikon 12-24 lenses we are talking about here.

 

Leica *had* to go digital and at the time, the M8 was the best they could do, I miss mine. But if we can all weather this nasty-a$$ economy, then maybe in a few years, Leica will have solved the full frame issue or at least come close and we will have the dream rig.

 

Erl, I understand the acceptance thing, I put up with it from 1995 with the Kodak NC2000 camera. I actually quite liked my 28 Summicron on the M8, I rarely used anything else on it actually, so I did more than get by..

 

And to be clear, the primary reason I sold my M8 was to concentrate my Leica system fully to the time sensitive Kodachrome Project. Otherwise, I had the upgrade planned and had a really trouble free rig from the start.

[garygsandhu]

Given the recent new lenses from Leica, it would be reasonable for Leica to never introduce a full frame M.

[bill]

Given the recent new lenses from Leica, it would be reasonable for Leica to never introduce a full frame M.

 

Why?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[badpets]

could you elaborate on it?

 

Given the recent new lenses from Leica, it would be reasonable for Leica to never introduce a full frame M.

[TimF]

Why?

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Indeed. A most curious assertion.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Gary,

 

Then they would not have made those lenses full-frame, it would have been easier and cheaper to make them APC lenses, and they could easier have made them faster for APC only. Looking forward to hear your reasoning why those lenses supports abandoning fullframe digital M cameras.

 

Personally, I think these are much needed wider lenses which makes the M8 more flexible... but you do not get the same look from a 35mm 1.4 on the M8 as you do form a 50mm lux on fullframe..