Leica's Future Plans (not speculation)

In case the FF M is too difficult or far off, here's an idea in the meantime. I think a 1.2 crop factor would be a worthwhile and perhaps achievable step. It would convert each lens to pretty much an already familiar focal length.

21mm --> 25mm

24mm --> 28.8mm

28mm --> 34mm

35mm --> 42mm (getting to be a popular walkaround focal length)

50mm --> 60mm (the area covered by the M6/M7/MP finder anyhow)

75mm --> 90mm
 
Bobfrance said:
R10 and Alternatives
There will be no digital SLR aka R10
But there will be - and we are working on this - a suitable solution
how to use R lenses digitally
It's very important to us, that owners of R lenses can take pictures
digitally in the near future
This solution will have nothing to do to with the S2
Leica has examined intensively which features and what price tag a R10 had to have
Price would have been 6000 - 7000 Euro and it would have been far behind the competitors
This would have been a solution for the existing customer base
but not for the new customers
Therefore the R system is discontinued, the existing system runs out
There is no due date for the new solution
Indirect notes by Stefan Daniel to 35mm full format
Definitely it's not going to be a SLR
Click to expand...

sounds like a full frame EVIL to me. shape it like a hassy swc with a linhof technika or rollei 6000 series side grip, that would be damn cool. 36x36 sensor would be even cooler!
 
jaapv said:
Yes- only a crop factor does not convert a focal length
Click to expand...

Ah, c'mon. Equivalent focal length, then. You know how we say it these days-- such and such a focal length times its crop factor, gives its "35mm equivalent." So if a 28mm lens on an M8 has a 37mm equivalent. then you stand the same distance from the subject as if you had a 37mm lens on a 35mm camera. And you get the same perspective. The DOF will be greater.
 
Rob-F said:
Ah, c'mon. Equivalent focal length, then. You know how we say it these days-- such and such a focal length times its crop factor, gives its "35mm equivalent." So if a 28mm lens on an M8 has a 37mm equivalent. then you stand the same distance from the subject as if you had a 37mm lens on a 35mm camera. And you get the same perspective. The DOF will be greater.
Click to expand...


Somebody needs to come up with a better "term" to describe this. A 50mm lens will always be 50mm, regardless of whether you mount it on a Leica film camera, a Leica digital, a 4x5 view camera, or a 16mm sub-miniature. Too many people think that when you put a 50mm lens on a camera with say, a 1.5 crop factor, it becomes a 75mm lens.

Unless you know enough to really understand what's going on, you're likely to come up with the wrong idea of how the lens will behave.




Regarding the rest of this discussion, it seems that when any product (new camera) gets introduced, there is quickly a list of suggested improvements. Many of those can be achieved in software. I just ordered my M8.2 a couple of days ago, and should have it within two weeks. I hope the software continues to evolve, and updates are released every so often. I'd also hope that hardware updates become available (rather than people having to buy a whole new camera) as this would put Leica in a different (better) class than disposable cameras that people seem to need to replace every two years.
 
Rob-F said:
Ah, c'mon. Equivalent focal length, then. You know how we say it these days-- such and such a focal length times its crop factor, gives its "35mm equivalent." So if a 28mm lens on an M8 has a 37mm equivalent. then you stand the same distance from the subject as if you had a 37mm lens on a 35mm camera. And you get the same perspective. The DOF will be greater.
Click to expand...

Wrong on many counts!

28mm lens on a 135mm (full-frame) camera has:
- a 28mm focal length
- a 28mm depth of field
- a 28mm field of view

28mm lens on a 1.33x cropped camera has:
- a 28mm focal length
- a 28mm depth of field
- a 37.2mm field of view

It's such an easy vocabulary!

But then again, people are constantly mixing up easy words, such as anxious and eager, jealous and envious, love and infatuation...
 
It depends how you define "depth of field". Ignoring magnification, yes. If you're judging by acceptable sharpness on say an 11X14 print then a 50mm lens at f/8 has less depth of field than a 50mm lens on a 6X9cm image from 120 roll film.
 
Another important factor is how you define 'field of view'. There is no such thing as a field of view expressed in millimetres; it's an angular measurement.

Cheers,

R.
 
+1! I've spent my entire working life at the mercy of "studies" done by people who love to argue and debate scientific theory ad infinitum, who live to prove each other wrong, and who refuse to consider anecdotal evidence no matter how strong and clear it is. For me photography has always been a welcome outlet away from that. My definition is, if the equipment lets me get the shot the way I want it, it's good. So far the M8 hasn't left me hanging.
 
Rob-F said:
Ah, c'mon. Equivalent focal length, then. You know how we say it these days-- such and such a focal length times its crop factor, gives its "35mm equivalent." So if a 28mm lens on an M8 has a 37mm equivalent. then you stand the same distance from the subject as if you had a 37mm lens on a 35mm camera. And you get the same perspective. The DOF will be greater.
Click to expand...
You may say it that way these days - I don't. Focal length is focal length and it is a property of the lens, not of the sensor.
In practice it turns out that the focal length character of a lens does not differ appreciably on the M8 from a film M, strange as it may sound and despite all theoretical considerations.
 
Hasselblad has announced the CFV-39, "New, coming soon (est Aug)", $13,995

Completely compatible with their older V series (500c, 500cm, 501c, 501cm), etc

CFV39. 39MP, 36x48mm Sensor ( Approx)

So, do I really need a Leica S2? I have a rack of wonderful Hasselblad lenses already.

Vick
 
Matus said:
As not being a Leica owner or hard core fan (but admirer maybe ;) ) I am wondering - putting all the digital stuff aside - are the M7 and MP the last film M cameras we are going to see?

In other words - is there a need for a major upgrade/development that possibly could yield a new film M camera in the future? What you - Leica film users think - as there anything to improve on the current M film bodies?
Click to expand...




A dedicated leica 35mm film scanner would be nice,one thats better than myminolta dimage 5400 mk1.:bang:
 
Kevin said:
Wrong on many counts!

28mm lens on a 135mm (full-frame) camera has:
- a 28mm focal length
- a 28mm depth of field
- a 28mm field of view

28mm lens on a 1.33x cropped camera has:
- a 28mm focal length
- a 28mm depth of field
- a 37.2mm field of view

It's such an easy vocabulary!

But then again, people are constantly mixing up easy words, such as anxious and eager, jealous and envious, love and infatuation...
Click to expand...


Lens perspective also doesn't scale with different format sizes; it's a property of the absolute focal length. So that a 90mm "portrait" lens on a 35mm format camera will have different perspective than a 45mm lens on a 4/3 or u4/3 2x crop format camera. That 45mm lens on the 2X crop camera will display the "big nose" problem of using short focal length lenses for portraits.

~Joe
 
Joe ... and jaapv. I hate to disagree, but the thing is that lenses do not impart anything to perspective. It is solely based on the subject to photog distance and it this case if you frame at portrait the same way with a true 50 versus a 25 cropped down to a 50 angle of view - the results are the same except for the dof. I'm actually not sure about the dof, but believe that is correct. Thus a 50 on a 2x crop will give the same slight flattening of features as a 100 on an M7 if you frame exactly the same way.

I've always argued that, but I have to say that for an old timer such as myself there is something comfortable at the same time to getting back to familiar territory. I know what a 50 feels like and hate some kind of math in my head to re-calculate another focal length. But for those raised on cropped form factors .... I doubt that they see things the same way. Likely just the opposite as they have learned their comfort level with cropped lenses.
 
oh yeah...well, a square sensor, whatever the size, would be neat. there aren't any square format sensors on the market that don't involve some sort of crop factor. i bet it would be an unexpected hit.
 
I didn't like the M8 when i first got it. The focus patch was off and it was loud.

After I got the upgrade with the quieter shutter and framelines and a repair to the focus patch, I started to fall in love with it. I'm still kicking myself for not getting the sapphire glass. But oh well.

I've come to accept the 1.3 crop. It doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would. And these days I even use the camera in Auto White Balance and it works fine. One less thing for me to worry about. I will say the only issues I have with the M8 now. Is that the shutter could be quieter still. And above all the high ISO performance is terrible. I never use the thing beyond ISO 640. The results are always terrible at 1250 and 2500
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom