Leica M9 – A Marriage with Canon?

J

jfretless

Established
Local time
4:05 PM
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
113
Taken from canonrumors.com;

There has been rumblings in the past about Leica using a Canon sensor in the evolution of the M.

I received an email today stating that Canon and Leica are in negotiations for Canon to supply the sensor in the upcoming Leica M9. It’s written the M9 will utilize a version of the 5D Mark II sensor. The new Leica is to be launched at Photokina 2010 in Germany.

Yes, a full frame digital M!

CR’s Take
I’ve heard about a Leica & Canon marriage before. It’s obvious Leica needs a better solution than the Kodak sensor currently in the M8.

This may be nothing more than someones wish…… and a great wish it is.

Link to original; linky


Sounds pretty cool...
 
Seems extremely unlikely, but it would be great.

Of course Leica would probably charge $5000+ for it, when the sensor comes from a $2700 camera. Sure the RF mechanism ain't cheap, but neither are the mirror and AF systems on the 5D2.
 
uh oh, the true believers are readying to brand you a heretic, witch, or practicer of the black magic (ndoke), for even suggesting such a thing :D.

Personally, can't see why Canon would be interested. At least it's a fun rumor.

That's so funny, it made my dog laugh
 
Last edited:
Do you think Canon would be arrogant enough to have to have their name on the front of a camera with a Canon sensor in it? I see them having a problem with that. From a cost stand point, Canon could save a lot of R&D cost by not having to design a digital RF and just sell sensors to Leica.

John
 
dexdog said:
uh oh, the true believers are readying to brand you a heretic, witch, or practicer of the black magic (ndoke), for even suggesting such a thing :D.

Personally, can't see why Canon would be interested. At least it's a fun rumor.

That's so funny, it made my dog laugh
Click to expand...


It would be doubly amusing if Canon refused and Nikon stepped in :D
Oh wait, doesn't Sony make their full frame sensor? Even better! :p
 
jfretless said:
Do you think Canon would be arrogant enough to have to have their name on the front of a camera with a Canon sensor in it? I see them having a problem with that. From a cost stand point, Canon could save a lot of R&D cost by not having to design a digital RF and just sell sensors to Leica.

John
Click to expand...

I don't see why Canon would want their name on a camera that might sell a couple of thousand copies a year. No benefit to Canon R & D, because they couldn't care less about designing small volume articles like expensive rangefinders
 
Last edited:
Usual disregard of the laws of physics...

It's astonishing how many people wilfully (or out of sheer stupidity) refuse to understand the difference between the Leica flange-to-sensor distance (under 30mm) and an SLR flange-to-film distance (typically over 40mm).

There's no reason why Canon shouldn't make a sensor. But equally, there are quite good reasons why they shouldn't, including no experience in this highly specialized field (unlike Kodak).

Tashi delek,

Roger
 
The micro-lenses of the current Kodak sensor seem to do their job, though the low light performance isn't up to the competition. I agree with Roger. I think Kodak is better suited but you should never count the Japanese out in taking a technology and running with it.

My guess, however is that Kodak has not been wasting time since the M8 introduction. The economics for Canon make no sense to me.
 
apparently the new digital backs for the Mamiya 645 system are using microlenses as well. I'm not sure who's making their sensors, but thought it was interesting that someone else is also using microlenses now.
 
Bnack said:
apparently the new digital backs for the Mamiya 645 system are using microlenses as well. I'm not sure who's making their sensors, but thought it was interesting that someone else is also using microlenses now.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure either, but aren't they Kodak sensors too?

Tashi delek,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Usual disregard of the laws of physics...

It's astonishing how many people wilfully (or out of sheer stupidity) refuse to understand the difference between the Leica flange-to-sensor distance (under 30mm) and an SLR flange-to-film distance (typically over 40mm).

There's no reason why Canon shouldn't make a sensor. But equally, there are quite good reasons why they shouldn't, including no experience in this highly specialized field (unlike Kodak).

Tashi delek,

Roger
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I was thinking. ...who doesn't know about flange-to-sensor distance. ....like duh.

John
 
As long as we're on the topic of micro-lenses, why is the only solution a micro-lens on each sensor site? Why couldn't a single optical correction lens be placed between the lens flange and the sensor to solve this problem?

/T
 
Bnack said:
apparently the new digital backs for the Mamiya 645 system are using microlenses as well. I'm not sure who's making their sensors, but thought it was interesting that someone else is also using microlenses now.
Click to expand...
Do you mean an offset microlens arrangement? Because I thought pretty much all digital camera sensors used microlenses.
 
Since we're on it, why can't they make microlenses that filter IR at the sensor, obviating the need for the lens-mounted IR filters for the M8?
 
All dslrs use microlenses, of increasing efficiency. However, there are issues on rf's because the angle of incidence varies much more with focal length. Interestingly, Sony annonced a backlit cmos sensor (i.e. the light was meant to hit the back of a reversed sensor compared to current arrangements) in the fairly recent past. Advantages included 'wider acceptance angle and improved low light sensitivity'. Therein lies a hope (and I'm sure that Canon have also thought of this...)

Not so sure about the rumour though, I thought that Canon would sell to Zeiss:)

Mike
 
It might be true but i guess leica's strategy is insisting on CCD and if they needed FF CMOS sensor they could deliver in 2008 Photokina and instead of silly upgrades in m8.2 a decent sensor would have done better in times of stock crisis.

about the microlenses DALSA already solved the problem im now using a P40+ with 24mm digitar and no green cast problems and thats very likely leica works closer with its partner than working with some company like canon. oh by the way i really like the quality of 5dmkII i tried some of my leica r lenses on it and it works great.
 
Last edited:
I hope they do it. That would be great.

I wonder if there would still be the IR problem or if the photos would look much different than the Canon 5D with L lenses look? I wonder if the M8 body could hold all the electronics for a full-frame sensor. The 5D is certainly not a small camera.
 
sirius said:
I hope they do it. That would be great.

I wonder if there would still be the IR problem or if the photos would look much different than the Canon 5D with L lenses look? I wonder if the M8 body could hold all the electronics for a full-frame sensor. The 5D is certainly not a small camera.
Click to expand...

Apart from the pentaprism and big mirror box, the 5D2 will shoot around 5 frames a second iirc - thats a huge amount of data to shift through the buses. An RF doesn't really need that sort of speed, so it's possible the architecture could be smaller - not saying I know this, but an EP-1 is a lot smaller than an E420

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom