A New direction for Leica with Canon?

[Migracer]

Does any one know if Leica has a representative that monitors this forum,?

 

[Roberto]

What I could believe is a partnership.. Or Leica using Canon sensor technology.
R.

 

[Charles Woodhouse]

There was a much better world sixty years ago, and although I was quite young, I'm glad I was there. I'm sorry most of you missed it.

 

[Roberto]

There was a much better world sixty years ago, and although I was quite young, I'm glad I was there. I'm sorry most of you missed it.

Don't tell this to my parents! 🙁
They just survived WWII having many of their relatives lost during the conflict..
R.

 

[Ray Nalley]

I'm glad Photokina is only a few weeks away. The flights of fantasy and wild speculation are clearly higher than in previous years. Micro 4/3 digital M rangefinders, Nikon M mount DRF's and now Leica rebadged Canon's. Strange times! 😉

 

[morgan]

Yeah, there are some seriously crazy rumors fiying around. I don't see why Leica would rebrand a canon dslr. Leica also makes a ton of money selling glass, so unless these cameras were changed to accept R lenses, it just doesn't make any business sense.

I could see a partnership similar to the Panasonic one, ending with a better sensor in the M8. But just re-branding a camera that they then can't sell anything else for defies logic.

 

[italy74]

Have I to suppose that - for counterpart - Zeiss could be interested in joining Nikon?

 

[Avotius]

Have I to suppose that - for counterpart - Zeiss could be interested in joining Nikon?

oh please, everyone knows that whats really going to happen is that Canon will throw in the towel with Nikon and make a film camera with a white flag on it.

😀 Just kidding, I hope Canon wows our socks off.

 

[rbsinto]

If it's true, the final product will be both overpriced and overrated.

 

[Roger Hicks]

your sentence wasn't perfect either. it sounds a bit awkward because it has double negation which changes meaning of sentence in english. "with that grammar you can't" would be much better... 😛

Shakespeare used double negatives for emphasis. The idea that one negative cancels out the other is a fantasy devised (as far as I know) in the 18th century and seized upon by countless tin-eared pedantic schoolteachers since. It should be a criminal offence to mislead pupils with this one.

Cheers,

R.

 

[antistatic]

Shakespeare used double negatives for emphasis. The idea that one negative cancels out the other is a fantasy devised (as far as I know) in the 18th century and seized upon by countless tin-eared pedantic schoolteachers since. It should be a criminal offence to mislead pupils with this one.

Cheers,

R.

We don't need no education 😎

 

[varjag]

I've seen it sitting on the shelf right next to Nikon digital rangefinder, I swear!

 

[darvin2138]

The new name would be LieNon... taken from... it's a Lie and None in existence...😀😀

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I think Gabriel should have written "No, with that grammar you can't." That added comma (missing in his sentence) reinforces the negation without turning the sentence into a faulty one with a double negative.

Its all in the details! 😉

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Shakespeare used double negatives for emphasis. The idea that one negative cancels out the other is a fantasy devised (as far as I know) in the 18th century and seized upon by countless tin-eared pedantic schoolteachers since. It should be a criminal offence to mislead pupils with this one.

I do not not disagree with your non unstatement that isn't not above nor not below. 😉

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I think Gabriel should have written "No, with that grammar you can't." That added comma (missing in his sentence) reinforces the negation without turning the sentence into a faulty one with a double negative.

Its all in the details! 😉

Did I not miss nothing?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

your sentence wasn't perfect either. it sounds a bit awkward because it has double negation which changes meaning of sentence in english. "with that grammar you can't" would be much better... 😛


edit: hahaha i saw that i wrote "which is changes" 😀

Irony is indeed a lost Art :bang:

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

A bad venture would be to have a Leica R accept Canon FD lenses.

Now, that'd just be silly. No modern SLR camera can accept FD lenses without an optical adapter to make it "focus" when at "Infinity".

Zeiss glass and Leica glass in an autofocus mount for my Canon 5D. Now that makes me slobber (is that a word?)

There goes the keyboard. I mean, not there it doesn't go.

 

[MCTuomey]

I would be interested in Leica coupling digital white balance control with a mood ring. It could be a simple menu option, absent menu access issues, say, MRWB (mood ring white balance) adjacent to AWB. Hmm ...

Gabriel, the Cosina-produced Zeiss ZE lenses don't create even a corner drool?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I would be interested in Leica coupling digital white balance control with a mood ring. It could be a simple menu option, absent menu access issues, say, MRWB (mood ring white balance) adjacent to AWB. Hmm ...

Gabriel, the Cosina-produced Zeiss ZE lenses don't create even a corner drool?

If the ZE lenses are at least the same quality (image-wise) as the M-mount siblings, then yes. Very much indeed. I just wish their 35mm f/2 lens were a bit less...shall we say...SUV-esque?