stunsworth Posted May 2, 2009 Share #41 Posted May 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) If so elementary and nothing very challenging, it's surprising then that nobody has done it up to now. Let's hope it doesn't involve a curved sensor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 Hi stunsworth, Take a look here New lenses and the future of FF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
guidomo Posted May 3, 2009 Share #42 Posted May 3, 2009 Well, many things are straight forward for scientists but it is engineers who have to turn the ideas into reality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinb Posted May 3, 2009 Share #43 Posted May 3, 2009 Frankly I don't care that much about the crop thing. I've used cameras with all sizes of sensors and to get acceptable results the FF cameras is the ones you have to stop down the most to get the best results. If Leica can't produce a FF sensor I think they should try to make a 1.15x sensor because it would make a lot of sense. After a 1.15x crop lenses would become: 16mm = aprox. 18mm 18mm = aprox. 21mm 21mm = aprox. 24mm 24mm = aprox. 28mm 28mm = aprox. 32mm 35mm = aprox. 40mm 50mm = aprox. 58mm 75mm = aprox. 85mm 90mm = aprox. 105mm I would consider this crop ratio very interesting and wouldn't care much about it not being FF and don't think other would either... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted May 3, 2009 Share #44 Posted May 3, 2009 Well, many things are straight forward for scientists but it is engineers who have to turn the ideas into reality. I'm quite sure it works perfectly in the drawings Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted May 3, 2009 Share #45 Posted May 3, 2009 You must use a flat sensor obviously otherwise it would not be compatibele with the existing M lenses. Moreover there is not an obvious benefit to a curved sensor. Also, you need to forget about microlenses as they are needlessly complicated. The generic technology already exists. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
razerx Posted May 6, 2009 Share #46 Posted May 6, 2009 Speaking of new lenses and FF we should be glad the M8 has a cropped sensor else there would not have been the incentive to create all these new wide angles, including the fast f/1.4 ones. How's that for reversed logic? Seriously the crop does not bother me. So before I was shooting with a 35mm Summilux asph as my main lens and now I am using the 28mm Summicron. Same size, same hood, same feel but one stop slower. No big deal. All my large format lenses have large image circles enough to cover 5x7 with ample movements. Are they wasted because I shoot 4x5? If they cover 5x7 then 5x7 is full frame, right? It is really all in the head. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 6, 2009 Share #47 Posted May 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The fact that you don't mind, and that your workflow means that 1 stop is no big deal, doesn't mean that this holds for anyone else. I lament the fact that my WATE is a 21/24/28mm lens, rather than a true super-wide. I regret the fact that my favorite lens, the 50 Lux ASPH, is a small tele, instead of a normal lens, forcing me to use the 35 Lux ASPH instead, another great lens, but not, to me, as good. I mourn the fact that my 28 Cron is one stop slower than the 35 Lux ASPH I would be using on FF. I also miss the either larger pixels or greater resolution the FF sensor would bring. There are lots of reasons for wanting FF. Your experience/opinion is not universal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
razerx Posted May 6, 2009 Share #48 Posted May 6, 2009 (edited) Your experience/opinion is not universal. Neither are yours. So what? It is a good camera. No sense whining about it. Edited May 6, 2009 by razerx Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 6, 2009 Share #49 Posted May 6, 2009 I am not whining about anything. I have the camera and enjoy it, other than its tendency to go into a zombie state when I visit Köln (I have only visited Köln once). I do however want to state for the public record that I look forward to a digital FF Leica M, and that I have specific reasons for that. That is not whining, that is a data point for future planning of the digital Leica M series. The difference between your opinion not being universal and my opinion not being universal is that you make statements like "No big deal". Perhaps you meant "no big deal for me", which reads very differently. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guidomo Posted May 6, 2009 Share #50 Posted May 6, 2009 There is this persistant notion that a 1.33 crop is the optimum. I have yet to understand why. I like that I get some more room at the tele end, but this is not outweighed by the sacrifices for wide angles. Getting a fast (1:1.4) 35mm equivalent is expensive with the M8 (I have just paid for the Summilux 24, so I know). And as Carsten pointed out, a larger sensor will have a better high-ISO performance, so will provide better low light performance to boot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 6, 2009 Share #51 Posted May 6, 2009 A bigger sensor will only have a different performance if the pixel count per square mm is less. If that is the same, there is no difference in quality, and there is no advantage for longer lenses on the smaller sensor. Cropping the image down to the size of the crop sensor will render the same result. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 6, 2009 Share #52 Posted May 6, 2009 What about DoF? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 6, 2009 Share #53 Posted May 6, 2009 With these relatively small sensor size differences the shift in DOF is small enough to be neglected, except in very critical shots. About 2/3rds of a stop. It is not a linear function of format. I would have to look up the complicated version of the mathematical formula to give you the exact relation. In theory, of course you are right. An interesting thing is that Leica themselves have it wrong in the instructions booklet of the new lenses "there is no difference in DOF between film and the M8. The DOF marks can be used in the same way" (paraphrased from memory} Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted May 6, 2009 Share #54 Posted May 6, 2009 I can understand such a statement given the absence of FF cam in Leica's current offer but in practice, at least mine, suffice it to use a FF camera along with a cropped one to "see" the difference. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyleica Posted May 6, 2009 Share #55 Posted May 6, 2009 Leica fullframe M9 bas been confirmed (Leica source) : 18 Mpx fullframe sensor No more IR filter needed (hopefully) Same body size as current M8 Considering excellence of Leica optics designed exclusively for full 35mm format this is going to be a big relief for us to just forget about focal length conversion. 16mm will stay a 16mm and Leica wide angle lenses will demonstrate their full power because simply they are designed to be the best. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted May 6, 2009 Share #56 Posted May 6, 2009 Leica fullframe M9 bas been confirmed (Leica source) : etc, etc. Again with the arrant nonsense. Prove it. Put up or shut up, and stop wasting server space on unsubstantiated rumour. Regards, Bill Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 6, 2009 Share #57 Posted May 6, 2009 (edited) blah blah blah confirmed blah blah blah (hopefully) blah blah ? (Leica source) Leica doesn't start rumours. They make press releases. Edited May 6, 2009 by carstenw Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted May 6, 2009 Share #58 Posted May 6, 2009 Leica fullframe M9 bas been confirmed (Leica source) : 18 Mpx fullframe sensor No more IR filter needed (hopefully) Same body size as current M8 Considering excellence of Leica optics designed exclusively for full 35mm format this is going to be a big relief for us to just forget about focal length conversion. 16mm will stay a 16mm and Leica wide angle lenses will demonstrate their full power because simply they are designed to be the best. But why do your 'confirmed' specs and details keep changing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted May 6, 2009 Share #59 Posted May 6, 2009 One would have thought that this "source" could have confirmed whether IR filters were necessary or not, given that they have made firm statements about everything else. What is amazing is that the specs have already changed since you posted this rumour in the Erwin Puts thread... Your source had better make his/her mind up. One more for the "spike" methinks... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovelyleica Posted May 6, 2009 Share #60 Posted May 6, 2009 (edited) Won't prove anything here, even if I could, it's Leica's job. This is just information. You believe it or you don't, it's your right. (sorry but no spec has ever changed between posts, only rounded 18.5 to 18mpx. You should read more carefully ;-) ) Edited May 6, 2009 by lovelyleica Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.