Digital back for M Leica

[Ronald_H]

Man, that naysaying is so tiring...

YES!!!

Have you seen the tread at Photo.net? A guy has made a FF (!) MF back work with Leica glass. Utterly impractical (yet), but it works.

I think the OP's solution will be APS-C, but for 900$ that would be a steal considering what we all spend on our Leica gear 😀

I'd definitely, DEFINITELY buy one. Where do I send my money?

Edit: Make the back interchangable and it will be fantastic. No need to buy a Panasonic G1 after all.

 

[Nugard]

You probably need to add one more category as in "H**l no!"😕

One of the true charms of Leica M bodies is the film camera experience itself! Why digital? What is wrong with film? Digital cameras are a dime a dozen these days but there is only one Leica film camera experience and it gives different results to boot. Now, where is that Rodinal? Oh, there it is...

Now, back OT...I am sure there are others here with no interest in digital. I use both film and digital cameras professionally, but would not have bought the M3 if it were digital.

So, IMHO, h**l, no.:angel:

Agree.

To me I like to use my M2 because it doesn't have any electronics. The simplicity of the camera is what makes it a joy to use. My vote is NO but for none of the reasons given. John

Agree.

A digital back for a film M is simply not practical.

Agree.

But, I voted "YES"... Why?.. Because it would be great to make a competition for M8(.2), or maybe M9, for reasonable money?.. It will compel Leica to work harder.

Also I'm a big fan of FILM. And don't like digital cameras...
I think, that such digital back, would back wouldn't be charm for most of M-users, because of simplicity of Leica M cameras... Nothing else is needed... Only film and well-trained eye...😉

 

[paachi]

I am a R-D1 + M2 owner and a relative newbie to the RF world. However, given the experience so far, I will definitely vote for a digital interchangeable back for the M2. I dont want a screen to chimp. Just a readout counter for number of pics I can take and battery life. It can always shoot RAW. No need for a USB port also..we can use a card reader. The fact that the digital back has to be interchangeable with film (like MF) is important to me so that I can go back to film when I want to indulge and switch to digital when I am lazy..also it will be helpful to revert back to reliable manual goodness when electronics fail..

Regards,
Prashant Kumar.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Olympus will likely get there first

Olympus will likely get there first

I DEFINITELY want a digital platform for my LTM and M-mount lenses!! But the RD-1 has too much of a cult status and therefore still sells for too much. And the M-8/M-9.. not for my pocketbook.

It looks like, at the moment, Olympus may win this horse race. Panasonic's G1 shows off the micro four-thirds technology, but Olympus is working on the rangefinder form of this idea. Both will be able to mount M lenses. Now lets see how long it'll be before they improve on the crop factor. A year? Two?

The Panasonic G1 with lens goes for $600! A year or two from now, Olympus rangefinder micro four-thirds body with a 1.5 crop factor for $600? Why not.

 

[Fred Burton]

Olympus is building a digital rangefinder? I hadn't heard that. Interesting.

 

[gnarayan]

Olympus is building a digital rangefinder? I hadn't heard that. Interesting.

A digital mirror less compact with a 2x crop factor. No one said optical rangefinder or even electronic eye level viewfinder. I imagine a rangefinder is wishful thinking.

Cheers,
-Gautham

 

[kbg32]

Minimum of 10 - 12 megapixels would be great, 8 is bit small for commercial applications.

 

[Joop van Heijgen]

An interchangeable digital back for the different models of the M-cameras would be ideal for digital M usuage. In theory even better than a M8 version because a interchangeable digital back gives the possibility to update your older M camera in the future....like a mechanical M camera that can use the latest film development!

 

[PaulRicciardi]

I'll speak for myself and myself only:

I'm a working photojournalist who really loves street photography in my spare time. The newspaper world went digital years ago and thus I own a modest DSLR system (2 bodies, 3 lenses, 1 flash) for my newspaper work. My Leica is my street camera and I shoot black and white film when doing street photography.

With all of that said, I would love to use a Leica for both my newspaper work and my street photography. An interchangeable back would be ideal-digital back for newspaper, film for street photography. I'd be willing to deal with an increase in size-it would still probably be smaller than my DSLR and zoom lens, and I don't need anything more than 6 MP. I've spoken to a few other press photographers who own Leicas but don't use them anymore for newspaper work despite wanting to.

I'm 19 years old, I work for the newspaper, freelance on the side, and wait tables weekend nights. I'm also a full time college student-I can't afford an M8. I'm busy, I'm broke, but I would shell out somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 dollars for a digital M back in a heartbeat. If it means finally consolidating my equipment down to one system even if I have to deal with a crop factor my money's sitting here waiting for you.

Hope this actually goes somewhere, there's been talk of a digital M back for years but it never happens. In the mean time I'm still saving for an M8.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Sure, replace the swing down door with a full frame sensor, battery pack fits where the film cassette would have gone, a Leicavit style baseplate holds all the needed electronics, and the LCD screen is an extra priced option because real photographers don't chimp.

 

[PaulRicciardi]

It looks like, at the moment, Olympus may win this horse race. Panasonic's G1 shows off the micro four-thirds technology, but Olympus is working on the rangefinder form of this idea. Both will be able to mount M lenses. Now lets see how long it'll be before they improve on the crop factor. A year? Two?

I doubt Olympus will ever change the crop factor...that would mean going to a bigger sensor. The small form factor of the micro 4/3rds camera is in part thanks to a smaller sensor. Granted I'm sure you could shove a larger sensor in there but I highly doubt Olympus would actually do it. Part of the micro 4/3rds concept is that you can mount standard 4/3rds lenses on the micro 4/3rds bodys. Keep in mind that the 4/3rds lenses were designed from the ground up to have image circles that cover the 1/2 frame 4/3rds digital sensor. Put those same lenses on a larger sensor and you won't be able to cover the sensor. It would be the same effect you get when you mount a crop factor Nikon lens on a full frame D700.

IMO, it would be stupid for Olympus to develop the micro 4/3rds camera and lenses around the 2x crop sensor and then move to a larger sensor which the old lenses couldn't support. They have stuck very firmly to the idea that full frame sensors and lenses are unnecessarily large. I think if you read the Olympus literature or talk to their representatives they firmly believe that their half frame sensors with smaller, lighter cameras and lenses are the ideal digital solution. Olympus has done a good job of addressing the downsides of the 2x sensor-those being mostly noise and lack of wide angle lenses. The latest generations of 4/3rds sensors are competitive as far as noise goes and Olympus has developed some good wide angle options-the Zuiko 7-14mm (35mm equivalent 14-28mm) is a hell of a lens as is the 11-22. They've also just released a consumer level 9-18mm which looks decent. I can't see the company undermining everything they have done over the past 5 years by introducing a full frame camera-it would almost be like admitting their original concept was flawed.

Hopefully they will just release some fast, wide angle primes with the M4/3rds camera...a full frame digital rangefinder would be great, but Olympus is just too invested in the 4/3rds sized sensor and accompanying lenses to ever produce anything larger, let's see what they can do with the micro 4/3rds system-I for one am keeping an eye on it.

 

[splitimageview]

There was a thread here a while back about DrLeoB's digital M back. The thread seems to have been deleted. There were actually photos taken with the mockup.

The back must be 1.5x crop factor or less, else just buy a G1 or the Olympus next year.

There are some technical challenges to be overcome -- developing firmware for such a product would be seriously non-trivial. It could be done, depending on how much money one wanted to throw at it.

Might be easier to make it work with a Nikon RF as the entire back comes off.

 

[carpediem007]

Just continue the development of the Siliconfilm EPS-1

Just continue the development of the Siliconfilm EPS-1

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=881562#post881562

I'd buy two... 🙂

Cheers,
Michael

 

[photogdave]

Geez, don't any of you remember the threads here about Dr. LeoB's digital M3?
I'm too lazy to search for them, but basically RFF member Dr. LeoB already has a working digital back for an M3. Look it up!

 

[Fred Burton]

Has anybody seen anything recent about LeoB's project. Did he abandon it or still working on it?

 

[Jamie Pillers]

I agree with your points, although one can hope! 🙂 And I share your hope that Olympus develops some great wide-angle primes to go with the micro four-thirds body.

 

[johnastovall]

Why would one call the Olympus micro 4/3 a rangerfinder? That's what missing is a rangefinder. It's just a P&S with interchangeable lenses. And while the Panasonic G1 at least provides an EVF, Olympus from the Photokina Mock-up doesn't even do than.

 

[Mackinaw]

Go for it! But I wonder if it's possible to develop a digital back for the M series that will deliver good image quality, and be reasonably compact, for only $900.00.

Jim B.

 

[photorat]

Has anybody seen anything recent about LeoB's project. Did he abandon it or still working on it?

I wouldn't be surprised if he got bought off to halt development (like his predecessor who got even closer to a working model, though I forget his name). The idea of an interchangeable digital back is just far too threatening to Leica, I think. (So in other words, and to answer the OP's original question, YES I'd get one for my M2). Leica are already victims of their own success. Their cameras last too long to stimulate new purchases in what is already a niche market. An effective interchangeable digital back would kill the M8.

Crop factor is a problem, however. As noone thought of the difficulty with framelines?

 

[PaulRicciardi]

Why would one call the Olympus micro 4/3 a rangerfinder? That's what missing is a rangefinder. It's just a P&S with interchangeable lenses. And while the Panasonic G1 at least provides an EVF, Olympus from the Photokina Mock-up doesn't even do than.

Personally I've never called the Oly a rangefinder.

I think what we're getting at is that while it isn't a true rangefinder the form factor emulates a rangefinder and thus one would be more likely to utilize the camera as if it is a rangefinder. Take a look at the Ricoh GRD or the Sigma DP1, neither are true rangefinders but they both are fairly well liked by the RF community simply because they

a) produce good files
b) have sharp prime wide angle lenses
c) allow one to scale focus and then shoot with an external optical viewfinder like one would do with a RF
d) have form factors similar to a RF

I shot with a GRD for a while and an external optical VF and it was a similar shooting experience to using a prefocused Leica. Now, shooting with the GRD in low light or when I needed precise focus was a whole other story. The Leica beat the pants off of it there.

In any event, the point I'm trying to make is that for those of us who enjoy shooting with a rangefinder the Olympus micro 4/3rds becomes a viable digital option. Many of us can't afford to shell out for the M8, and R-D1s are getting harder to find not to mention impose a 1.5x crop factor. Subsequently, something like the M4/3rds Olympus becomes attractive to someone wanting to replicate the rangefinder experience-sharp wide primes, quiet, small. It'll never be the real thing, but for some of us it will be close enough.

No need to split hairs over what we call it, sure it doesn't have a RF mechanism, but if the cameras allow me to shoot as if I am using a RF who really cares? I don't think I will ever buy one, but still, I can definitely see the appeal for an RF user.

Besides, I'd rather have a digital M back 🙂