Jump to content

Mark Norton and the FF m9


scjohn

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I received an electronic "Leica newsletter" today mentioning that the forum crashed briefly. The newsletter then expressly mentions Mark's post (almost an endorsment of the thread). I usually ignore M9 posts but with Leica calling the post out for praise I HAD to read it.

 

My feeling is that the M9 is coming and the battery size is changing. I think Leica wanted us / me to read Mark's post so that we / I will not complain too much about the fact that M8s and M8.2 will not be able to be "upgraded" to FF or that we will be unable to use our extra $200 m8 batteries.

 

These tea leaves are fun especially when Leica says "here, look in my cup"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, I do remember a conversation along the lines of "go on, Mark, break the news to them and we'll give you a dead Digilux 3 to take apart for your trouble" but maybe that was in my dreams. Or should that be nightmares?

 

I claim nothing more for these threads I do than trying to make them a bit more interesting than the "what lens do I take to Timbuktu?" variety.

 

There's no doubt Leica would like to keep to the same body dimensions and same battery if they could to reduce tooling costs and it will be very interesting to see if and how they've done it.

 

You might think the M8 is densely packed but not if you've seen a Sony A900. That's densely packed. Leica have come a long way since the days of 2004/2005 when the M8 was laid out on a shoe-string. They've done a remarkable job in my view with the S2, squeezing the huge sensor into that size of body, so maybe a FF Digital M is a walk in the park by comparison. If so, all credit to them.

 

Leica may not be making the money we'd like them too yet, but they are transformed from the days when a good year was one when we got a new lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark, brilliant stuff as always. I understand that the basic design concept for the M8 was done about four years ago. Not too many of us have dissected the M8 or any camera for that matter in the manner you have.

 

But I'm wondering this--if working alone--you managed to come up with what seems like a fairly straightforward solution for using the existing body and battery dimensions together with a full size sensor, why couldn't Leica--with so many engineers and technicians--figure out the same thing during the design phase in 2004-5 and produce a full-frame version in time for the camera's late 2006 release? I don't understand why they didn't do it, other than the fact that the full frame sensor might have added too much cost to make the camera marketable. Then again, I bought a Canon 1Ds full-frame SLR in 2004, so it was possible to make reasonably-priced full-frame SLR, and it doesn't seem like it would have been any more difficult to make the M8 a full frame camera. I'm not saying it would be simple, but it seems like a matter of just moving a few parts around, and maybe coming up with a slightly smaller but improved battery. Hasn't battery technology changed enough in the past 4-5 years to allow for a smaller battery of equal or greater power?

 

(Please--I'm not a Leica conspiracy theorist, just an inquiring photographer).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Don't forget that as late as 2004, Leica were saying a digital M was not even possible because of the unique characteristics of the wide-angle lenses and it wasn't until Epson did us all a service by introducing the RD-1 that Leica was shaken out of its "nicht moeglich" lethargy.

 

At that time, Canon has the field of FF to themselves; they make their own sensors unlike the other vendors and Leica were/are much too small to do that. Even now, a FF Digital M remains a significant technical challenge and we're all going to be interested to see how (assuming the "if") they've addressed the 3 issues on the "hope to do better next time" list: vignetting with wide-angles, IR sensitivity and sensor noise.

 

What I showed was just an experiement when I had a spare afternoon. The business of developing a real-world Leica FF Digital M is very different!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, the problem was not so much the body architecture - although I'm sure it was more than a bit of a headache, but finding the sensor technology that could be adapted to a rangefinder. Sure, the RD1 was a fine camera, but in reality the APS sensor in it was already struggling, and I'm sure nobody would have accepted a Leica M with that sensor size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget the FF DSLRs have lenses that are retro-focus, with distances from the sensor that are greater than a rangefinder. This was Leica's design issue: they would not compromise quality for convenience, with the technology available at that time. Good for them, I say!

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - but Leica started designing retrofocus lenses to accomodate the M5 - and there the issue was to avoid the metering cell. It was only later that they went into the design advantage that retrofocus has over symmetrical lenses in correcting aberrations on fast wideangles - that only became possible with the advent of more powerful calculating technology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hasn't battery technology changed enough in the past 4-5 years to allow for a smaller battery of equal or greater power?

 

You have only got to look at the latest Canons to see smaller batteries which carry more punch. Personally I fail to understand why the idea of retaining the M8/8-2 battery (an old design) to put into an 'M9' should be any sort of consideration. Its like handicapping a potential design before you start. I also not that Canon have redesigned the 1D series 3 times and this has been accepted (the changes between MkI and II were subtle - ~1mm dimensionally - but the MkIII is substantially different) and I don't see why the M8/8-2 bodyshell has to be retain exactly as is either. (My previous post on this suffered database crash deletion).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I find it very practical that the Digilux3 uses the same battery as the Digilux2 - and the small Panaleicas share the same battery for years already. Technical considerations are all fine and well, but practicalities may override them. Many users will have an M8 as a backup to the M9 - and the advantages of one battery system need not be explained.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've dismantled one of the HongKong ultra cheap batteries to see how the cells are organized inside. There is a 10mm by 34 mm steel case with rounded sides, that is consistent with having four batteries of diameter 8 mm inside the case. They are wired in parallel, since the Leica battery output voltage is about 3.5V, the potential of a single Li-Ion cell. In series it would be four times as great.

 

If the capacity of cylindrical cells of this size has increased at a typical rate over the past 5 years, three such cells would have 5-10% more capacity than four cells in the older batteries. ( Moore's law for batteries has been they have doubled in capacity about every 10 years over the past 30-40 years.) I don't know if the power needs of the M9 will be less than the M8 (better integration, ASICs replacing general purpose microprocessors, smarter power management) or greater (moving 80% more data at a greater rate from the imager into the processing chips and from there to memory).

 

So the options open to Leica at this point would seem to include:

 

A) a battery 26mm wide, same thickness, fitting only the M9 and offering about the same amount of energy.

 

B) a battery with higher energy density, no change in size, usable in both M8 and M9, with longer life for the M8 use, and supporting the additional requirements of the M9 if it needs more power. By Mark Norton's demonstration, this makes the M9 body get a bit bigger.

 

C) keep the same batteries, spend the time solving other problems...

 

I think the M9 is real, despite my skepticism, since my new copy of Capture One has a profile for it.

 

scott

Edited by scott kirkpatrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I find it very practical that the Digilux3 uses the same battery as the Digilux2 - and the small Panaleicas share the same battery for years already. Technical considerations are all fine and well, but practicalities may override them. Many users will have an M8 as a backup to the M9 - and the advantages of one battery system need not be explained.

 

What if a new battery gives you twice as many pictures before you have to recharge it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What if a new battery gives you twice as many pictures before you have to recharge it?
I never take that many pictures without taking the camera from my eye. In a series of 400, there is always a lull to change the battery. I find it far more interesting to have just one charger and a few batteries to schlepp in 110 degrees .
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even now, a FF Digital M remains a significant technical challenge and we're all going to be interested to see how (assuming the "if") they've addressed the 3 issues on the "hope to do better next time" list: vignetting with wide-angles, IR sensitivity and sensor noise.

 

Hello Mark,

 

Yes I agree, that is and always has been the biggest hurdle for a FF RF. However I do believe it's a FF M9 that's coming on 09/09, I will tomorrow have my lenses back from being professionally coded, work that is not being carried out by Leica but someone here in The UK who is very much a Leica specialist and he again yesterday confirmed that he has held a "test camera" recently, it is being tested by someone he knows who is close to Leica here in UK.

 

He agrees with me that if Leica have successfully conquered the problem of a FF sensor and RF in real hardware developments then he takes his hat off to them. Also like me, he believes it may also have been achieved via software, and to me as long as it works I see no problem in that although there are possibly some people who would frown at that option. But as I have already said, so what .... as long as it works, just take a look at Hasselblad, they knew that to bring the 28mm lens for the H3D to market in an acceptable time frame and within an acceptable R&D budget they would have to accept certain design limitations knowing full well these limitations could be fully corrected within the dedicated software ( Focus ). I defy anyone who has seen the results from this lens to say they are anything but astounding, I just wish I could use that lens on my H1 and P21 combo:rolleyes:

 

Anyway back to the point, I for one will not mind if the problems have been overcome via software as its the end result that matters to me. Sadly I will not be an "early adopter" as I have already spent £12k on my Leica M kit in last ten months and now need to take a break so to speak:o

 

Leica have rolled out several new lenses and concepts ( ie S2 ) in the past year and whilst their finances may be tight right now ( not much difference with most other companies there ) as long as they can weather this storm I am sure the future will indeed be bright for Leica.

 

regards Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

I never take that many pictures without taking the camera from my eye. In a series of 400, there is always a lull to change the battery. I find it far more interesting to have just one charger and a few batteries to schlepp in 110 degrees .

 

My bet is that you are up for a disapointment.

 

But the mobile phone manufacturers are starting to agree on a standard for charging mobile phones, so who knows, maybe that will happend to camera manufacturers also? Anyway, since battery technology improves, new products are likely to come with new and improved batteries compared to their predesessor

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaapv

 

I own 5D and 5D2 cameras. I would have really liked them to have taken the same battery BUT in practice I find that the (much) higher capacity 5D2 battery outweighs the inconvenience of differing batteries.

 

Of course Leica could be clever and produce a smaller battery which will fit the earlier chargers and cameras with an adapter....:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...