Full Frame M8 with Panasonic sensor? Leica Rumors site?

[eleskin]

Well, this cant be true, or can it?

The M8 with a full frame sensor from Panasonic? A Photokina surprise?

I suspect this is rubbish, unless the M8 will survive as a cheaper entry model into the digital M system.

 

[Richard Marks]

About 1 year ago my dealer said that Panasonic were working on a cheaper version of the M8 but I did not take this too seriously. It is however the same source who said there would be a 4/3 leica even when leica were denying this and then the X1!

The thing about a good rumour is that to be believeable there has to be some element of posibility and considering that the R and D investment for the M8 / M9 has been done it would be possible for a third party to do this, and theoretically why not? Panasonic have done it with other leica cameras so presumably there is some shared intelectual property. Obviously it would never have the 'bling' factor of the red dot, but there would be a fair reduction in price. Panasonic would have to consider if there was a reaonable market. As long as there is short supply of the M9 and the price is £4,850, then there would be an opportunity. Would prospective M9 buyers swallow their pride and go Lumix for 2/3 the cost probably not. 1/2 the cost getting tempting...

Richard

 

[Jamie123]

About 1 year ago my dealer said that Panasonic were working on a cheaper version of the M8 but I did not take this too seriously. It is however the same source who said there would be a 4/3 leica even when leica were denying this and then the X1!

Well, the X1 is not 4/3 so I guess he was wrong.

 

[Bugleone]

The dealer could have been refering to the Panasonic GF1. That does take Leica lenses and is a lot less than the M8 price.......

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/.a/6a00df351e888f88340120a5ec81ad970b-popup

 

[ernesto]

In my opinion, It will be a matter of time, and any camera manufacturer could build a full frame digital camera with M mount...
Not necesarily Panasonic...

E

 

[Richard Marks]

I think the issue is really if any other manufacturer can see it as a profitable excercise. Given the price and scarcity of the M9 there could be an opportunity.

Would prospective M9 buyers go for something non Leica if there was a choice albeit of a lesser marque? I am not sure.

Richard

 

[DerekF]

I don't see why Panasonic would get involved in this unless they could build a body AND bundle a lens for under, say, $2,000. Panasonic sells stuff that's aimed at the mass market, and already, $2,000 is pushing (beyond?) the limit of what most consumers will spend on a camera, especially one like a rangefinder that most people aren't familiar with. Considering the fact that there are no zoom lenses and that it would probably be difficult if not impossible to sell these in great numbers in a kit configuration (if such a kit were possible at this time), I don't see what they would gain in the long run.

But hell, if they offered something comparable to the M9 at 2/3 the price, for sure I'd take it! :angel:

 

[Mephiloco]

It'd be stupid for Panasonic (for example) to make a full frame digital that was M-mount. I'd imagine they'd adopt or come up with a new lens mount, something that at least had the capability of autofocus and electronic iris control etc as I don't see the appeal of a M-mount rangefinder in the mass market.

Also, considering how much people spend on M-mount lenses, it's not too much to ask of them to pay the price of an m9 or m8 for a digital body. Even if the body were released at say, $2000, most people who would want a full frame for $2000 wouldn't want to have to use manual focus only lenses or give up macro/tele capabilities.

From a fiscal stand point it doesn't make sense to me for Panasonic to make an M-mount body.

 

[Richard Marks]

It'd be stupid for Panasonic (for example) to make a full frame digital that was M-mount. I'd imagine they'd adopt or come up with a new lens mount, something that at least had the capability of autofocus and electronic iris control etc as I don't see the appeal of a M-mount rangefinder in the mass market.

Also, considering how much people spend on M-mount lenses, it's not too much to ask of them to pay the price of an m9 or m8 for a digital body. Even if the body were released at say, $2000, most people who would want a full frame for $2000 wouldn't want to have to use manual focus only lenses or give up macro/tele capabilities.

From a fiscal stand point it doesn't make sense to me for Panasonic to make an M-mount body.

I have to agree. Still, the price and shortage of M9's does allow for competition theoretically speeking.

Richard

 

[Tuolumne]

Would prospective M9 buyers go for something non Leica if there was a choice albeit of a lesser marque? I am not sure.

Richard

The rumor is undoubtedly false. However, a full frame R-D2? Sure, why not!

/T

 

[Richard Marks]

The rumor is undoubtedly false. However, a full frame R-D2? Sure, why not!

/T

Why not indeed! I have never understood firstly why Epsom entered into this and secondly having done so, why they departed.

Personally I still regret the demise of Contax. The G series gave leica something to think about and I really think we would benefit from some competition in digital RF's.

Richard

 

[DougFord]

[FONT=&quot]Panansonic could build a FFGF1 in their sleep. It’s a matter of when not if.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Auto focus lenses designed/built by Panasonic complete the package. Will there be an adapter for Leica lenses?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Not exactly an M8 clone. 😛[/FONT]

 

[sojournerphoto]

I'd buy a full frame digital Ikon - even if it is a lesser marque. Given the short supply of M9's it would be nice if they could offer one sooner rather than later, as long as it worked properly.

Mike

 

[Richard Marks]

[FONT=&quot]Panansonic could build a FFGF1 in their sleep. It’s a matter of when not if.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Auto focus lenses designed/built by Panasonic complete the package. Will there be an adapter for Leica lenses?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Not exactly an M8 clone. 😛[/FONT]

Now that does sound interesting! An auto focus thingy which could take M lenses without a crop factor. That would allow them a product saleable with panasonic auto focus to a larger market and also use m lenses. If so the focusing would most likely be the live view variety rather than a propper rangefinder . Even so, I would be very interested.

Richard

 

[Mephiloco]

It'd be neat if someone made a 'universal' full frame digital that was designed wih the intention of taking legacy lenses. It could build on the autofocus system used in the Contax AX (autofocus on manual focus lenses by moving the film plane back and forth. I'm not sure how well the system worked, but a full frame camera with its own set of lenses but designed with maximum lens compatibility would be pretty nice; Essentially a 5d Mk2 in that it would have its own lenses, unlike the 5dmk2 in that it would be smaller and allow for mounting of legacy lenses (with infinity focus) and autofocus on manual focus lenses.

I don't think it will happen. It would revitalize the camera market, especially in regard to previously obsolete lenses, unfortunately it makes little sense to revitalize a used market from the fiscal stand point of a manufacturer.

 

[kbg32]

Richard,

I agree with you wholeheartedly. The Contax G series was a great system with great lenses. I remember reading that Contax was planning a digital version of the G2. It is sad of their demise. If they were around and their N digital was successful, who knows where the state of rangefinders would be. Unfortunately, as time marched on, though Leitz produced great products, mainly their lenses, they never were an innovator in terms of their cameras. The innovations in the development of their cameras were few and very far between.

 

[back alley]

[FONT=&quot]Panansonic could build a FFGF1 in their sleep. It’s a matter of when not if.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Auto focus lenses designed/built by Panasonic complete the package. Will there be an adapter for Leica lenses?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Not exactly an M8 clone. 😛[/FONT]

based on my experience with the g1 and the panasonic kit lenses, i would buy one.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

It seems highly unlikely to me that Panasonic would bother with a "full frame" system of any kind. Full frame is totally arbitrary, especially to a manufacturer that was never invested in 35mm film cameras to begin with. m4/3 is their "full frame," and eventually they'll be able to achieve image quality equal to the 35mm cameras of the past, by improving their sensors. Indeed, the only reason any of us give a crap about full frame is that we have all these lenses we're accustomed to giving us a particular field of view.

I suspect they're going to put all their energy into m4/3, and more power to them. The 20/1.7 has made me a total convert--they are not just making cheap-ass little consumer cameras.

That said, I would have no complaints about an R-D2 either!

 

[back alley]

It seems highly unlikely to me that Panasonic would bother with a "full frame" system of any kind. Full frame is totally arbitrary, especially to a manufacturer that was never invested in 35mm film cameras to begin with. m4/3 is their "full frame," and eventually they'll be able to achieve image quality equal to the 35mm cameras of the past, by improving their sensors. Indeed, the only reason any of us give a crap about full frame is that we have all these lenses we're accustomed to giving us a particular field of view.

I suspect they're going to put all their energy into m4/3, and more power to them. The 20/1.7 has made me a total convert--they are not just making cheap-ass little consumer cameras.

That said, I would have no complaints about an R-D2 either!

not sure of this fits but knowing that they started from scratch, why is the 14-45 zoom a 28 to 90 lens in 35mm? why didn't they just call it a 28 to 90 and be done with it? they are still tied to a 35 mm frame of mind.

 

[rxmd]

not sure of this fits but knowing that they started from scratch, why is the 14-45 zoom a 28 to 90 lens in 35mm? why didn't they just call it a 28 to 90 and be done with it? they are still tied to a 35 mm frame of mind.

No, you are. The 14-45 is a 14-45. Focal length, as the name implies, is an optical parameter that is tied to the lens in terms of physics.

The idea that a medium wideangle is a 28, and a tele is a 90, only happens to work on 35mm. I have this beautiful 90/f8 over in the other room that is a strong ultrawideangle on the camera it's mounted on, and calling it a 17 (just because that's what it would have to be if it were a lens for 35mm film which it isn't) would be a physics absurdity.