jonoslack Posted August 20, 2009 Share #41 Posted August 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) HI Jamie So we'll see how much of a 24 I'll get in a normal full frame M9, I suspect it will be like shooting the 21 with the M8 (and I didn't use a VF for that lens). I think that actually, it would be the 28 'cron which would be like shooting the 21 with the M8. If the FF M8 is real, and it has a couple of stops better ISO, then a 28 'cron on the M9 will be better than a 21 'lux on the M8 (but with the same field of view) . . . and if others are right about the viewfinder and the FOV, then you'll be able to use it with the viewfinder. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 20, 2009 Posted August 20, 2009 Hi jonoslack, Take a look here M9 and used Leica lens prices. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jonoslack Posted August 20, 2009 Share #42 Posted August 20, 2009 I think that's right. Demand for ultra-wide-angle lenses with M-bayonet has certainly been instigated by the crop-factor of the M8. So also the WATE and the new 18-mm Elmar could find themselves on the loosing side (I was sure that there was no FF-M ahead, when i bought the Super Elmar in July....). On the other hand I think the 135-mm lenses will loose their outsider status on a full frame digital M (whenever it will come and will have the framelines for this focal length....). I think the WATE would be fantastically successful on an M9 for landscape work - 16-21 is a great range, the frankenfinder already has the framelines. Of course, the great unknown is whether the WATE will be good enough right to the corners. I think one of the great spin-off's from the M8 adventure will be the availability of really good wide angle lenses for the M system. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted August 20, 2009 Share #43 Posted August 20, 2009 HI Jamie I think that actually, it would be the 28 'cron which would be like shooting the 21 with the M8. If the FF M8 is real, and it has a couple of stops better ISO, then a 28 'cron on the M9 will be better than a 21 'lux on the M8 (but with the same field of view) . . . and if others are right about the viewfinder and the FOV, then you'll be able to use it with the viewfinder. Hmmm. You are convincing me Jono Interesting! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted August 20, 2009 Share #44 Posted August 20, 2009 A future M camera will likely address one or more of the following: - Full Frame - Improved High ISO - Reduced IR Sensitivity - Updated electronics (processing speed, size, power consumption) - Improved viewfinder (one can but hope) - Reduced size - Price Some are in any case mutually exclusive but we'll see on 09/09 what the mix is. I don't actually think there will be a full frame M9- the light rays coming from wide angle lenses are at too acute an angle to image a pixel. I would love to be proven wrong, however. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted August 20, 2009 Share #45 Posted August 20, 2009 I don't actually think there will be a full frame M9- the light rays coming from wide angle lenses are at too acute an angle to image a pixel. I would love to be proven wrong, however. I'm standing by making no assumptions until after it's launched. If the M9 isn't FF there's going to be one HECK of a hangover party here ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted August 20, 2009 Share #46 Posted August 20, 2009 Hey Riccis--you keeping or dumping the 24 Lux in light of full frame? I sold my 28 and am going 24 (which should work on the M8 as well)... I'm figuring I will be down to 21 CV 24 Lux 28 CV 1.9 (a nice lens, actually, though no 'cron) 35 Lux ASPH 50 Lux ASPH 75 Lux 90 Fat Elmarit Which should give me what I want, I think, for full-frame (till I win the lotto and can add a 28 and better 90) 24 lux is already gone and the 21 lux is now on the market... After shooting some film with the 21, I realized that for my style both 21 and 24 are too wide, 35 is too tight and have finally settled for the 28. Also, something tells me that the 28 Elmarit is going to be another must have lens for the M9... Cheers, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 20, 2009 Share #47 Posted August 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) We're expecting a new 35mm Summilux design in any case and if the M9 is full frame, there's a 28mm Summilux hole which needs to be filled. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted August 21, 2009 Share #48 Posted August 21, 2009 {snipped} Also, something tells me that the 28 Elmarit is going to be another must have lens for the M9... Cheers, Riccis, That is the most cryptic thing I've heard posted here yet! Why on earth would the 28 Elmarit (ASPH?) be a must-have lens when you have the 28 'cron again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted August 21, 2009 Share #49 Posted August 21, 2009 HI Jamie I think that actually, it would be the 28 'cron which would be like shooting the 21 with the M8. If the FF M8 is real, and it has a couple of stops better ISO, then a 28 'cron on the M9 will be better than a 21 'lux on the M8 (but with the same field of view) . . . and if others are right about the viewfinder and the FOV, then you'll be able to use it with the viewfinder. Now that I'm thinking about it, of course you're right.... So having the 24 on the M9 will be like shooting my Leica R 19 on the DMR That's cool too... Ah hell. I just want all of 'em. Drat and blast! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted August 21, 2009 Share #50 Posted August 21, 2009 Riccis, That is the most cryptic thing I've heard posted here yet! Why on earth would the 28 Elmarit (ASPH?) be a must-have lens when you have the 28 'cron again? LOL! Because of its tiny size... Assuming the hypothetical M9 has a great high ISO performance. Cheers, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted August 21, 2009 Share #51 Posted August 21, 2009 If a full-frame M9 is introduced (and doesn't cost $10k), it should create something of a buzz. Not sure if Leica lens prices will go up, but I'm sure they'll stay strong. I've been keeping around extra glass since I have different preferences for film (full-frame) and M8 crop. So I look forward to being able to simplify my kit. I definitely plan to sell my 24 'Lux. I'm with Riccis--on film 24 is still a bit too wide for the way I shoot, at least when it comes to my main lens. And it's too big and expensive to keep around as a backup or special-purpose lens. I'll go back to the 28 'Cron and 50 'Lux as my main lenses. I'll keep the 21/2.8ASPH and 35/1.4ASPH for backup or special situations. And my 90AA will be my long lens. Not sure yet if I'll hang on to my 75 'Cron. With film my favorite combo was 28/50. Now with M8 I've been using 24/50. So I'm not sure if I'll settle on 28/50 or 28/75 with full-frame. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 21, 2009 Share #52 Posted August 21, 2009 Funny - my 50 and 28 will be the only lenses I DO get rid of if a full-frame M emerges. In exchange for a 35 of some flavor. Insipid focal lengths, IMHO, although they made a nice stopgap "35" and "70" on the M8. But leaving aside individual bias, I'd expect used lenses to gain a bit overall in demand/price as full-frame holdouts who left Leica altogether (or were R users) switch over. Ultrawides might drop a bit, but a 21 that is really a 21 instead of a slow, expensive "28" might be worth more - same for 24s. Also for the new 21/24 'luxes - I'm more inclined to pay $6000 for a 21 f/1.4 than a "28" f/1.4. Teles will likely become a bit more valuable - esp. 90 f/2 or 135s (if the framelines return) - both for their extra reach and because of the increased RF precision, as noted. Yes, removing the crop factor will reveal some shortcomings in corner performance. Leica did not build "crop-only" lenses, but a quick review of their own MTF charts show that almost all their lenses show a performance drop in the areas the M8 didn't use - 90 and 135 APOs and 28 'cron being the main exceptions. But I don't see that having a big effect - if you need a 50 f/1.4, you need a 50 f/1.4 - whatever the corner performance is relative to a 35 f/1.4 on an M8. I've been lucky - for the most part I kept and used the same lenses on the M8 as I did on film, shifted up one register. So the shift back will be pretty easy (Ooo, I want to see what the 15 c/v does on a big sensor!). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted August 21, 2009 Share #53 Posted August 21, 2009 Funny - my 50 and 28 will be the only lenses I DO get rid of if a full-frame M emerges. In exchange for a 35 of some flavor. Insipid focal lengths, IMHO, although they made a nice stopgap "35" and "70" on the M8. But leaving aside individual bias, I'd expect used lenses to gain a bit overall in demand/price as full-frame holdouts who left Leica altogether (or were R users) switch over. Ultrawides might drop a bit, but a 21 that is really a 21 instead of a slow, expensive "28" might be worth more - same for 24s. Also for the new 21/24 'luxes - I'm more inclined to pay $6000 for a 21 f/1.4 than a "28" f/1.4. You said it, Andy, it's all a matter of opinion, which is a good thing. While I may find the 24/1.4 too wide on full frame, some photographers don't, and I'm glad that's the case since I want to sell mine for a good price! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 21, 2009 Share #54 Posted August 21, 2009 Keywords will be vignetting and coding with the M9 i guess. The price of uncoded wides should drop normally, mainly the uncodable ones IMHO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted August 21, 2009 Share #55 Posted August 21, 2009 I don't actually think there will be a full frame M9- the light rays coming from wide angle lenses are at too acute an angle to image a pixel. I would love to be proven wrong, however.The new wide angle lenses are retrofocus designs where the lens does not penetrate very far into the body (unlike the super-angulon, hologon etc.). This means that by clever optics the angle of attack on the sensor is not at a (very) steep angle and so therefore the new lenses should be easier to accomodate on a FF sensor. This is the same as for SLR wide angle lenses where the lens has to stay out of the way of the mirror => retrofocus design. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 21, 2009 Share #56 Posted August 21, 2009 Well, let's be fair - Leica-M wides are less retrofocus than most SLR lenses - they still sit much closer to the image plane than the 40mm+ behind SLR mounts. cme4bains's argument was Leica's own argument for years - until the Epson R-D1 gave them a shove. The whole reason the M8 was cropped at 1.33x was that there were still problems to resolve in 2005/6 regarding Leica's short-wide lenses imaging on digital. Even with offset microlenses and thin IR filters and coding for vignetting correction. That's the flip side - Leica and Kodak have put a lot of work into developing a sensor that is different than most sensors, and gives the pixels a wider response angle. With 3-4 years additional development time, they presumably have pushed those technologies far enough for an even larger sensor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted August 22, 2009 Share #57 Posted August 22, 2009 We're expecting a new 35mm Summilux design in any case and if the M9 is full frame, there's a 28mm Summilux hole which needs to be filled. Mmmm, I don't know. Doing a new 35 Lux would be admitting there is something wrong with the old one and Leica aren't exactly known for that. We'll see.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikpeter Posted August 22, 2009 Share #58 Posted August 22, 2009 So sell my 35 summicron asph now or later? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_newell Posted August 22, 2009 Share #59 Posted August 22, 2009 So sell my 35 summicron asph now or later? Why, did it suddenly start performing poorly? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 22, 2009 Share #60 Posted August 22, 2009 Doing a new 35 Lux would be admitting there is something wrong with the old one and Leica aren't exactly known for that. We'll see.... No, but they are known for releasing new version of existing lenses - how many 35mm Summicrons have there been? They just need to say it's 'improved' compared to the old one. 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.