dfoo
Well-known
You cannot be serious. For _obvious_ reasons you cannot compare M8 raw files with those from a 1Ds, or any other camera and get a meaningful conclusion with respect to microlenses!
Olsen
Well-known
Indeed. So, I conclude that the effect of any 'micro lenses' is so minor that it hardly is relevant.
gavinlg
Veteran
I'd love for that full frame sensor to be a canon like some of the rumors were suggesting. Then you'd have the best sensor in an amazing body with the best lenses.
Sony/Nikon sensor would also be good, though I still prefer canon sensors.
Sony/Nikon sensor would also be good, though I still prefer canon sensors.
Olsen
Well-known
I can assure you that to put a Canon Full Frame CMOS from, say, a 5D II or a 1Ds III would be an optical disaster with vignetting/light fall off making wide angle lenses impossible to use. Note that vignetting on a 1Ds III with a 24 mm 1,4L is three aperture stops.
A rangefinder camera produces light rays at very steep angles that makes 'ordinary' DSLR sensors useless. If it hadn't been for this we would have seen FF-sensors already on the RD-1.
Also, Japanese developed sensors are not on offer to non-Japanese companies. I am convinced the reason is that they are developed with heavy subsidies from the Japanese Government/tax payers.
Ben Z
Veteran
The only thing I'm wondering about is how, if the M9 doesn't require IR filters on the lenses, it will work to shoot it along with an M8/8.2. Will we need to remove/reinstall filters each time we switch a lens from one body to the other? Or will the M9 have a UV+IR setting to correct the cyan corners (more severe if there is no crop factor?) so we can keep the IR filters on. Of course Leica has no obligation to consider the issue, but I hope they do/have/will.
ethics_gradient
Well-known
It's not as if they'd be giving them away for free to Leica, or that potential M9 sales would cannibalize much from the DSLR market.
climbing_vine
Well-known
Agreed, which is what others (including myself) mentioned in the last thread. There was a lot of scoffing and "that would never work" which strikes me as pretty silly given that all evidence suggests Leica has no miraculous new sensor. There would at least be rumors about, especially considering that their sensor partner is desperate for any good PR right now. Given that, some other option--no matter how distasteful it sounds to the purists--most be the truth. Assuming the release rumors are true.
I have a feeling Leica may have finally realized that the "purists" have prodded then to the brink of irrelevance and bankruptcy, and may be ready to do something truly interesting again. Back to the Barnack ethos, which had more to do with getting the best image possible out of equipment that was the most usable and practical for its day--the very antithesis of what Leica's current followers want (most of whom soon will be dead and no longer lighting their money on fire, let's face it).
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I think you've hit on the real issue. It seems pretty clear that if Leica is going to survive, it's not going to be because of M8's or M9's. As much as we old Leica users don't want change, Leica needs to do something cutting edge. Milking what's left of rangefinder users for the maximum amount of money possible for as long as possible doesn't seem like a sustainable business plan.
axiom
Non-Registered User
Actually I more want a full frame R-D1
Shall I expect one soon?
Shall I expect one soon?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
The M9 sensor will be a smaller version of the S2 sensor by Kodak with advanced microlens technology.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Over half the M8 buyers were new to rangefinders.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
"Over half the M8 buyers were new to rangefinders."
Do you think they will be M9 buyers? Does Leica really have four years to sell 15,000 M9's?
Do you think they will be M9 buyers? Does Leica really have four years to sell 15,000 M9's?
Olsen
Well-known
gdi
Veteran
Obviously the simplest answer, and most likely. I find the the M8 sensor does an good job solving the problem, so if a new tech microlens sensor can do as well with the M9/FF it should be fine.
And, I would think there will be similar software enhancements, Olsen.
climbing_vine
Well-known
How much smaller?
Kodak is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy; many people do not expect them to make it to the end of the year without filing. I find it absolutely beyond belief that they would come up with a microlens breakthrough that could put a full-frame sensor at the classic M flange distance with excellent image quality--and not be talking about it. They've been promoting the tech going into the S2 sensor literally for years, and that camera isn't out yet either.
Olsen
Well-known
Interesting, - and disturbing...
Ben Z
Veteran
Ordinarily I would bet my boots that not only would "The Regulars" line up for an M9, but so would a bunch of other guys who passed on the M8 citing the excuse that the M8 wasn't "full frame" and that it required add-on filters. But the reason I said "ordinarily" is because I think that in today's economy which is different from 2006, a portion of Leica's market base might no longer be quite as cavalier about plunking down $8K for a non-life-essential item that will depreciate heavily and quickly. I can only speak for myself in that I am pleased enough with my M8 that I will not be buying an M9 until at the very least there are Leica-warranteed demos available at the typical 1/3-off-new price. Three years ago I would've been looking forward to getting an M9 as soon as all the bugs are brought to light, as I did with the M8. Today my priorities have changed I guess.
Last edited:
John Camp
Well-known
That's what I expect -- I really don't see any other option, though I note that Leica's sometime-partner, Panasonic, is a leader in lens-correction software tech. But I don't think Leica owners would be happy with software correction. People have been experimenting with microlenses for years now, and if it's even possible to do this, I suspect Kodak will have done it...they are a big, awkward company, but still have good research facilities.
I'm not really so concerned with the sensor, though. It will be what it will be. I'm more concerned with updates of the other technology in the camera. I do think that the change has to be significant.
As for the IR filters, I think they were a kludge, and we're stuck with them for M8 versions of the camera. If you want to use the same lenses on an M8 and an M9, you'll have to shuffle filters. The problem with software correction of too much filtration is the same as with software correction of too little...there just doesn't seem to be any good way to do it.
gdi
Veteran
Obviously, if the M9 is full frame, it will be 36x24mm - that is compared to a 45x30mm of the S2.
As for Kodak going bankrupt, I suppose it could happen at any time, those predictions have been around for years. I hope they come through, but we'll have to wait and see.
And if there is truly an M9 on the horizon, it will have to have some new solution to accommodate M lenses, so they are, necessarily, keeping quiet about something.