"Digi-M" lenses. Why not?

[John Maio]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Both Nikon and Canon market "digital" lenses that are optimized for their digital bodies. I realize that optimization is around the cropped sensors that Nikon and Canon both use and those lenses cannot be used on film or (in the case of Canon) full-frame cameras, but why couldn't Leica optimize and market lenses for the M8.

 

Even Zeiss gets it with their very expensive "DigiPrimes" which are optimized for High Definition video:

 

:: CARL ZEISS DIGIPRIME & DIGIZOOM LENSES ::

 

I have no training or expertise in optics engineering, but it just seems to me that a lens optimized for the M8, with internal IR-resistant elements might make more market sense than external IR cut-off filters and other patchwork. The coding system already implemented would recognize that a "Digi-M" lens was mounted and whatever internal processing changes were necessary would be made automatically.

 

Sure, that would mean existing "M" lenses would have to be modified - or kept unmodified for film "M" use, but I sense that many are ordering new coded lenses anyway.

 

Now I realize that, because I returned my M8, I have no right to comment any longer, but I'm just curious as to what the group thinks.

 

. . . patiently waiting for an "improved" M8

[Advertisement]

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

[ptomsu]

I think that would be actually a good idea! Have the new M lenses optimized for digitl with an IR cut off coated lens element, which in many cases could be also replaced in existing lenses while yone has them modified to digital.

 

Peter

[Giulio Zanni]

Yes right, we just need to spend some more money...

 

Giulio

[rvaubel]

I think that would be actually a good idea! Have the new M lenses optimized for digitl with an IR cut off coated lens element, which in many cases could be also replaced in existing lenses while yone has them modified to digital.

 

Peter

 

Actually they could do this if they introduced a series of lenses that were only suited for the 1.33 crop factor digital format. There would be other atvantages to introducing an M mount lens that was exclusively for crop factor digital cameras. However the film people would be extremely pissed off. I don't know that Leica needs to irritate anyone else right now.

 

Rex

[albertwang]

I really like the idea quite a bit... this will help on the IR cure.

[John Maio]

Yes right, we just need to spend some more money...

 

Giulio

 

It depends . . .

 

If you are a long time film "M" owner, you probably have all the glass you need. I suspect Leica's marketing strategy is to attract a significant number of new owners who may have never owned a film "M". In that case, it would not be a money premium to order a digital lens to go with your digital M.

 

The ones caught in the middle are those who already own an M8, perhaps with some non-Leica lens, and really have no intention of bothering with coded lenses. For those people, buying IR filters seems like the only answer at the moment.

 

But, you know, we are very very early in the journey of the M8 and its progeny, so perhaps introducing a digital-specific lens family might not be seen as a stupid idea in the long term.

[aj37]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Both Nikon and Canon market "digital" lenses that are optimized for their digital bodies. I realize that optimization is around the cropped sensors that Nikon and Canon both use and those lenses cannot be used on film or (in the case of Canon) full-frame cameras, but why couldn't Leica optimize and market lenses for the M8.

 

I can't quite picture Leica doing this -- both because of the ire of film M users and because of the large R&D expense involved.

 

But I can imagine some other company doing it (e.g., some other company named Cosina?) This type of lens might be a hit with Epson R-D1 users as well.

 

To be successful, though, I think these lenses would have to offer something beyond what can be achieved with 24x36mm coverage, taking advantage of the design freedom offered by a smaller format.

 

For example, would anyone out there be interested in a compact, sharp, 35mm f/1.0 lens at a less-than-Noctilux price?

[John Maio]

I can't quite picture Leica doing this -- both because of the ire of film M users and because of the large R&D expense involved.

 

But I can imagine some other company doing it (e.g., some other company named Cosina?) This type of lens might be a hit with Epson R-D1 users as well.

 

To be successful, though, I think these lenses would have to offer something beyond what can be achieved with 24x36mm coverage, taking advantage of the design freedom offered by a smaller format.

 

For example, would anyone out there be interested in a compact, sharp, 35mm f/1.0 lens at a less-than-Noctilux price?

 

My thinking was that film M users are not necessarily in the demographic Leica is trying to attract. Film (only) users were not keeping Leica afloat before, and eventually will be in a decided minority as time goes on. I know its a tough thing to admit but, as an old geezer, Leica (or any other modern technology company) would be foolish to bet its future on me:p

[rvaubel]

I can't quite picture Leica doing this -- both because of the ire of film M users and because of the large R&D expense involved.

 

But I can imagine some other company doing it (e.g., some other company named Cosina?) This type of lens might be a hit with Epson R-D1 users as well.

 

To be successful, though, I think these lenses would have to offer something beyond what can be achieved with 24x36mm coverage, taking advantage of the design freedom offered by a smaller format.

 

For example, would anyone out there be interested in a compact, sharp, 35mm f/1.0 lens at a less-than-Noctilux price?

 

How about a nice 25mm/f1.4 or a 21mm/f2.0 . These lenses would be a lot more practical to produce in a 1.33 crop format. When you consider that the IR solution could be built in, Leica (or Cosina) could have a winner. Would work for RD1 owners too

 

Rex

[Guest Olof]

I really like the idea quite a bit... this will help on the IR cure.

 

 

Funny, some people think that a extra IR filter would be to expensive, and other are willing to pay thousands of dollars for a new digital M lens.... thats not logical, isnt it ? And waht will you do with your Digital M Lens, when Leica introduce the M9 with al fullframe sensor ?

[john_f]

Both Nikon and Canon market "digital" lenses that are optimized for their digital bodies. I realize that optimization is around the cropped sensors that Nikon and Canon both use and those lenses cannot be used on film or (in the case of Canon) full-frame cameras, but why couldn't Leica optimize and market lenses for the M8.

 

John,

 

Nikon and Canon both sell so-called digital dedicated lenses (G for Nikon, EF-S for Canon) because they both believe that small sensor digital cameras are part of their long-term strategy. AFAIK, other than the fact that these lenses were designed to cover a smaller image area (and might also include a more effective anti-reflection coating for certain rear elements), there is nothing truly unique about them form a "digital" point of view.

 

Leica, on the other hand, is clearly aiming for full-frame 24x36mm sensors in the long term (for both M and R cameras). While todays's M8 does use a smaller than FF sensor, you can be sure that with every new generation of Leica M digital (if Leica can get over the "teething problems" of the M8), digital sensors will get ever closer to FF.

 

No, I don't believe Leica needs to produce new kinds of M lenses dedicated only for the M8 (they have enough problems on their hands as it is). Rather, they should concentrate on selling the lenses they already make. Including that new wondeful Elmarit-M 28mm Asph !

 

Cheers,

 

John F.

[lct]

...And waht will you do with your Digital M Lens, when Leica introduce the M9 with al fullframe sensor ?

Good question indeed.

And what will we do if (when) the next digital M uses a built in IR-cut filter?

And what about the faithful rendition of colours in all that?

Just (much) curious.

[stunsworth]

If they make a digital only lens they are automatically excluding the vast majority of potential buyers using film bodies. I'd imagine that the R&D cost per unit sold would be enormous.

[lxlim]

My thinking was that film M users are not necessarily in the demographic Leica is trying to attract. Film (only) users were not keeping Leica afloat before, and eventually will be in a decided minority as time goes on. I know its a tough thing to admit but, as an old geezer, Leica (or any other modern technology company) would be foolish to bet its future on me:p

 

Strange you should post this The M8 is a serious contender for displacing the 1DSmkII and several lenses in my budget.

 

1.3x crop is not an issue for those coming from systems already having that. So adding a range of digital lenses for 1.3 crop is probably not a problem for them (or me).

 

Hope Leica considers the following features as a bid to expand their market and remove what some might consider as limitations to the system.

 

1. Add a built-in electronic viewfinder for lenses that cannot be accomodated with framelines. Say the 7mm ~ 24mm and 135 & beyond or Specialised lenses such as shift and tilt from rodenstock's digitar lenses(probably don't need the center ND filter on the M8) or for macro work.

 

Bigger lenses that might block the viewfinder can also be used here.

 

2) or add Live Preview as in the E330, to retain compactness of the body.

 

Would not buy anything Leica if they go bust though. Its my brains and not my heart talking here though. The M8 does many things for me but support is key.

 

Alex

[earleygallery]

I already suggested special 'digital' lenses for the M8 in another thread. But it was just as a joke.

 

Surely the most costly and unecessary solution to a relatively simple problem?

[lxlim]

If they make a digital only lens they are automatically excluding the vast majority of potential buyers using film bodies. I'd imagine that the R&D cost per unit sold would be enormous.

 

Or including a vast majority of potential buyers already used to using digital bodies. Though most of us are used to zooms and poor image quality, perhaps we might not be persuaded.

 

Currently a non-Leica user.

 

Alex

[stunsworth]

Alex, I think it will be a while before the number of digital M users overtakes the film users - there are a lot of film bodies out there :-)

[lxlim]

Alex, I think it will be a while before the number of digital M users overtakes the film users - there are a lot of film bodies out there :-)

 

Very true. Doing my homework on the leica M from perspective of a Canon DSLR user though and I like what I am seeing.

[kamilsukun]

The main reason for the production of a digital M is to reactivate the usage of the presently owned M lens inventory.

And, most probably M8 is a transition period product. In near future M will inevitably be a full format digital camera.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[leicapfile]

Makes good sense for the M8 owner, little if any to the company. Their plate is full for at least the mid-term horizon.

 

Jerry