(High credibility rumor) The new Leica mirrorless

[jsrockit]

Dear Godfrey, it seems to me that it is an overkill for a super-niche player like Leica to further sub-segment the market. Everytime a new product line is created, it dilutes the resources in design, planning, manufacturing, marketing, sales, and even management time. IMHO, Leica should have fewer product lines, but really excel in those lines. Just my 2 cents.

Jean-Marc, I think Leica is feeling its way around to see what sticks. I don't think the T series was a success for them. The Q could be a one off. The X line's days could be numbered. We don't really know its plans for the future. We do know the M will be around, but there's not much innovating to be done in that realm without making the M less of a M. If this camera comes out, I think it could be a smart move for Leica and will allow for the M to stay a M.

 

[JMQ]

Jean-Marc, I think Leica is feeling its way around to see what sticks. I don't think the T series was a success for them. The Q could be a one off. The X line's days could be numbered. We don't really know its plans for the future. We do know the M will be around, but there's not much innovating to be done in that realm without making the M less of a M. If this camera comes out, I think it could be a smart move for Leica and will allow for the M to stay a M.

That's a very logical explanation John.

 

[Godfrey]

Dear Godfrey, it seems to me that it is an overkill for a super-niche player like Leica to further sub-segment the market. Everytime a new product line is created, it dilutes the resources in design, planning, manufacturing, marketing, sales, and even management time. IMHO, Leica should have fewer product lines, but really excel in those lines. Just my 2 cents.

Perhaps Leica's management is looking for growth and feels they have the resources to do so. I don't try to be an armchair CEO, myself. ;-)

G

 

[Godfrey]

Near-range limit? The focus shift off the eyes is very obvious with, say, the Noctilux ASPH at 10-15 ft. I don't consider portraits without the eyes in focus as "usable" shots, especially for printing.

My go-to event lens is the 21mm Summilux which is great in tight crowds, but does not play well with center composition. 21mm is too wide unless the frame can be filled with multiple objects, which you have to choose one to focus on.

I recall that the M240 can't magnify focus in live view off-center...maybe this has changed in the M-P. Still, the ability to quickly and reliably focus off-center is not trivial.

I rarely use focus magnification in live view, and have no difficulty focusing the eyes properly at 10-15 ft, even wide open without Live View, with an f/1.2 lens. No, I haven't shot with a Noctilux in a while, but the difference in DoF between f/1.2 and f/1.0 at those distances is infinitesimal.

I don't use a 21mm for people shots in crowds very often. Any ultrawide will distort features too much at the edges. I prefer to stick with 28-35mm for those situations. Focusing, on the other hand, is no problem at all with a 21mm.

Sorry, but I cannot understand what your issues are. They don't match to my experience at all.

G

 

[jaapv]

I rarely use focus magnification in live view, and have no difficulty focusing the eyes properly at 10-15 ft, even wide open without Live View, with an f/1.2 lens. No, I haven't shot with a Noctilux in a while, but the difference in DoF between f/1.2 and f/1.0 at those distances is infinitesimal.

I don't use a 21mm for people shots in crowds very often. Any ultrawide will distort features too much at the edges. I prefer to stick with 28-35mm for those situations. Focusing, on the other hand, is no problem at all with a 21mm.

Sorry, but I cannot understand what your issues are. They don't match to my experience at all.

G

Agree. But using a rangefinder takes some affinity with the system and a learning curve.

 

[YYV_146]

I rarely use focus magnification in live view, and have no difficulty focusing the eyes properly at 10-15 ft, even wide open without Live View, with an f/1.2 lens. No, I haven't shot with a Noctilux in a while, but the difference in DoF between f/1.2 and f/1.0 at those distances is infinitesimal.

I don't use a 21mm for people shots in crowds very often. Any ultrawide will distort features too much at the edges. I prefer to stick with 28-35mm for those situations. Focusing, on the other hand, is no problem at all with a 21mm.

Sorry, but I cannot understand what your issues are. They don't match to my experience at all.

G

A 21mm F2.8 is easy to focus. A 21mm F1.4 is NOT easy to focus, especially something like the lux 21mm which has field curvature. All versions of the Noctilux also have field curvature, which makes off-center focusing even harder. And of course, with an 21mm or 24mm the M needs to be used in live view anyways, or focus and composed through two different windows.

Just because you can find workarounds for the issues (stopping down, composing towards the center) doesn't mean that the issue doesn't exist. Hasselblad specifically designed a focusing system to account for focus-and-recompose...if it's not an issue why would they go the whole length?

I like RFs if I'm using a moderate-speed 35mm or 50mm. But of Leica's excellent optical options, I feel that the best ones are simply not designed for an RF system at all. What is the point of having a super-performance, super-fast 21mm if all the native focusing options are so clearly subpar? And Leica advertises the lens as for "reportage"...if we're talking about moving subjects, an auxiliary viewfinder or EVF attachment is even less desirable.

 

[ferider]

I bet the SL is

1) an interchangeable lens version of the Q. Meaning a competitor to the Sony A7* for a wealthier customer segment.
2) a new AF lens line that relies heavily on in camera optical (distortion, mostly) correction.

Many product segments are OK if the technology (sensor, image processor, EVF, etc.) strongly overlaps, and if you can optimize the same production line for short runs of different products (think CV lenses, for instance). Because then, costs are mostly proportional to building the distribution channel, which can be made dependent on product success. Well, if customers accept long waiting periods, that is (which they do for the Q).

Roland.

 

[Godfrey]

A 21mm F2.8 is easy to focus. A 21mm F1.4 is NOT easy to focus, especially something like the lux 21mm which has field curvature. All versions of the Noctilux also have field curvature, which makes off-center focusing even harder. And of course, with an 21mm or 24mm the M needs to be used in live view anyways, or focus and composed through two different windows.

Just because you can find workarounds for the issues (stopping down, composing towards the center) doesn't mean that the issue doesn't exist. Hasselblad specifically designed a focusing system to account for focus-and-recompose...if it's not an issue why would they go the whole length?

I like RFs if I'm using a moderate-speed 35mm or 50mm. But of Leica's excellent optical options, I feel that the best ones are simply not designed for an RF system at all. What is the point of having a super-performance, super-fast 21mm if all the native focusing options are so clearly subpar? And Leica advertises the lens as for "reportage"...if we're talking about moving subjects, an auxiliary viewfinder or EVF attachment is even less desirable.

So you have trouble focusing your 'favorite' lenses. When I have trouble focusing my favorite lenses, I practice with them until I understand their quirks and can focus accurately and consistently.

Don't expect the camera to do everything that you should be learning to do. There are issues with everything, every camera is a compromise. An ultra-fast 21mm lens for "reportage"? Give me a break. That's just ridiculous.

Sounds like you need a good SLR or mirrorless TTL camera. Leica may have something coming up to take care of you... LOL!

G

 

[Godfrey]

Agree. But using a rangefinder takes some affinity with the system and a learning curve.

Indeed. A Leica M is not intended for people who expect the camera to do all the work.

G

 

[f16sunshine]

Precomposing a scene and then setting the focus point exactly where one want it in Live view (EVF) is a solution to focus and re-compose off center issues that one might encounter when focussing a rangefinder camera.

Godfrey... are you saying this is not true?

 

[anerjee]

This new camera will cause a bunch of M240s to come onto the used market -- and I may pick-up one.

I had the Sony A7s for almost a year, and it is lovely camera, but it is about as much fun as Microsoft Outlook.

 

[Godfrey]

Precomposing a scene and then setting the focus point exactly where one want it in Live view (EVF) is a solution to focus and re-compose off center issues that one might encounter when focussing a rangefinder camera.

Godfrey... are you saying this is not true?

I'm saying I've never had any problems focusing an ultra fast lens as long as I'm paying attention to what I'm doing and understand the lens' focusing quirks.

Using the M-P's EVF or LCD, I can look at and set focus on any part of the scene I want ... You cannot use targeted focus magnification like you can with the Olympus E-M1, but I don't find it necessary. I turn on focus peaking (which operates across the entire field of view) to rough in my focus point when I need to focus in a hurry. Once you understand what the focus peaking is showing you, you can focus anywhere in the FoV very accurately and very very quickly.

Of course, if you're trying to accurately focus a 21mm lens in a pack of moving people at f/1.4, hand held, you're going to lose about 50% of your shots anyway just from the motion of your body and theirs; that's not a situation where critical focus is going to do you any good. To me, if you're going to be so picky about absolutely critical focus, use a sturdy tripod and make test shots with incremental focus adjustments until you get it just so. Obviously, this only works with rather static subjects; even trees in a field will move with a little breeze and throw f/1.4 or f/0.95 focus zones off.

G

 

[f16sunshine]

Sony A7s is about as much fun as Microsoft Outlook.

haha!!

Excellent comparison 😀

 

[Godfrey]

This new camera will cause a bunch of M240s to come onto the used market -- and I may pick-up one.

I had the Sony A7s for almost a year, and it is lovely camera, but it is about as much fun as Microsoft Outlook.

Unless Leica is specifically tuning the sensor to work well with M lenses, I would never buy one to replace an M typ 240. I've got too much invested in M-mount lenses waste them on a body that doesn't work as well for them.

The Sony A7 worked ok with some M lenses, and more R lenses, but ultimately I sold it as it was a clunky thing to use. The M-P does a lot better for me.

G

 

[anerjee]

I meant I would buy a used M240

Unless Leica is specifically tuning the sensor to work well with M lenses, I would never buy one to replace an M typ 240. I've got too much invested in M-mount lenses waste them on a body that doesn't work as well for them.

The Sony A7 worked ok with some M lenses, and more R lenses, but ultimately I sold it as it was a clunky thing to use. The M-P does a lot better for me.

G

 

[Godfrey]

This new camera will cause a bunch of M240s to come onto the used market -- and I may pick-up one.

Unless Leica is specifically tuning the sensor to work well with M lenses, I would never buy one to replace an M typ 240. I've got too much invested in M-mount lenses waste them on a body that doesn't work as well for them.

I meant I would buy a used M240

Hmm. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I meant that I wouldn't sell an M240 unless the new camera was specifically tuned to work well with M-mount lenses, because I have too much invested in M-mount lenses (and like them too much) to buy something that required I use a whole different lens line.

I'm not sure why the new camera would cause a lot of people to sell their M240s; that was the underlying thrust of my comment. Sorry for the confusion.

G

 

[uhoh7]

Dude... that is completely sarcastic blather. If you can't use af ....ok fine.
Making it sound like a handycap is just plain silly 😛
The Sony is a peice of cake to use with native lenses and... it gives great results.
You just hate it because you wanted to love it more than you do :angel:

LOL you don't shoot alot of infinity landscapes, I can tell. Which is fine, I love your stuff, and on the street maybe AF is good. When you want a sharp scape the sony must be babied and it WILL give you a headache. I have advil in the Sony bag. ALWAYS. (angrything taught me to type like this)

Microsoft outlook is much nicer. 😀

I predict the stunner of the SL will be it accepts M glass also. If they are smart enough to make that happen, based on the Q's reception, I think they will do well. In fact I think they will make history with the first fully finished pro level EVIL FF.

Except it will be too big 😉

but not a Sony part inside. (My ire at Sony is their misleading marketing and deaf ear....long boring story.) I treat my A7 mod very well though:


L1038349 by unoh7, on Flickr

Need to black out the logo again.

 

[jsrockit]

It doesn't sound like this is going to be made for M lenses... but you guys have the m240 for that and Leica doesn't need a different shaped M. Perhaps R lenses though:

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/lei...r-in-the-history-of-professional-photography/

 

[willie_901]

I had the Sony A7s for almost a year, and it is lovely camera, but it is about as much fun as Microsoft Outlook.

Please don't copyright this phrase!.

 

[Vics]

I had the Sony A7s for almost a year, and it is lovely camera, but it is about as much fun as Microsoft Outlook.

Funniest thing I've ever read on RFf!