pizzahut88
Well-known
Canon had full-frame for a quite some time.
The 5D is still perhaps the cheapest full frame out there.
Nikon now has D3.
Now Sony is entering the race:
http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/200801/08-010/index.html
Now let's hope Sony sell their sensors to Carl Zeiss.
perhaps we will have full frame digital Zeiss Ikon.
Or perhaps Epson will re-enter the RF market and go make a full frame RF?
Epson shocked us before!!!! Who would have guessed they would make the first digital RF in the world?
Everybody said it's not possible.
I am not a engineer, but if I am you would surely know what I would try to make.
And everyone here would be terribly delighted.
What we have here is a proliferation of full frame sensors.
Times have changed.
There is no way in the world Leica could continue without one anymore.
Seasoned RF users would understand why the absence of the full frame rangefinders. But the lack of it would be hard to attract new RF users, especially when they have full frame sensors.
The 5D is still perhaps the cheapest full frame out there.
Nikon now has D3.
Now Sony is entering the race:
http://www.sony.co.jp/SonyInfo/News/Press/200801/08-010/index.html
Now let's hope Sony sell their sensors to Carl Zeiss.
perhaps we will have full frame digital Zeiss Ikon.
Or perhaps Epson will re-enter the RF market and go make a full frame RF?
Epson shocked us before!!!! Who would have guessed they would make the first digital RF in the world?
Everybody said it's not possible.
I am not a engineer, but if I am you would surely know what I would try to make.
And everyone here would be terribly delighted.
What we have here is a proliferation of full frame sensors.
Times have changed.
There is no way in the world Leica could continue without one anymore.
Seasoned RF users would understand why the absence of the full frame rangefinders. But the lack of it would be hard to attract new RF users, especially when they have full frame sensors.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
First, an M-series is a LOT smaller than a DSLR.
Second, a digi-sensor is a LOT more critical than film when it comes to the angle at which light rays strike it, and there is a great difference between a flange-to-film distance of under 30mm (Leica) and over 40mm (most SLRs).
Third (and closely related to the second) there is the IR filter problem with short flange-to-film distances.
Yes, we'd all love to see a full-frame digi M. So would Leica. If it were do-able, they'd have done it. If it becomes do-able, they will do it. But I'm not holding my breath and neither, I think, are Leica.
Cheers,
R.
Second, a digi-sensor is a LOT more critical than film when it comes to the angle at which light rays strike it, and there is a great difference between a flange-to-film distance of under 30mm (Leica) and over 40mm (most SLRs).
Third (and closely related to the second) there is the IR filter problem with short flange-to-film distances.
Yes, we'd all love to see a full-frame digi M. So would Leica. If it were do-able, they'd have done it. If it becomes do-able, they will do it. But I'm not holding my breath and neither, I think, are Leica.
Cheers,
R.
Damaso
Photojournalist
I don't know how many people said it wasn't possible for an SLR but a lot have said that it can't be done (right now or affordably) for the rangefinder. Without being an engineer I would have to disagree. Sure I think it would be tough and might be expensive but how many of us would pay an extra $1,000 for a full frame Leica M? Probably about as many as forked ovr $4-5,000 for the M8.
After talking with both Mr. Lee and Dr. Kaufmann I believe that they really want to make this happen for m users. I suspect this is part of the reason they are investing so much money in the new factory: they want to expand production. I don't know if that means they will make their own chip or continue to outsource or what but they know that we want a full frame sensor and if it wasn't possible for a few years yet they would have said exactly that and gotten the fence sitters who are waiting for the M9 full frame to come out (I include myself here).
But I suspect they might just make an announcement at Photokina this year or PMA next. They must have been working on this since the M8 came out and if there is one thing we shouldn't underestimate it is fine German engineering!
As always, time will tell...
After talking with both Mr. Lee and Dr. Kaufmann I believe that they really want to make this happen for m users. I suspect this is part of the reason they are investing so much money in the new factory: they want to expand production. I don't know if that means they will make their own chip or continue to outsource or what but they know that we want a full frame sensor and if it wasn't possible for a few years yet they would have said exactly that and gotten the fence sitters who are waiting for the M9 full frame to come out (I include myself here).
But I suspect they might just make an announcement at Photokina this year or PMA next. They must have been working on this since the M8 came out and if there is one thing we shouldn't underestimate it is fine German engineering!
As always, time will tell...
Last edited:
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
Roger Hicks said:
this is due to a rather deep structure of the light sensitive elements.
last year, we saw panasonic announce the development of sensor technique using flatter structures, which would help here. to determine to which degree it may help, must be left to experimenting with those sensors.
also, the IR issue is not necessarily adressed with this setup alone.
all this leads me to assume, that a 24x36 mm² sized sensor suitable for rangefinder cameras may be possible to build, but it is completely unclear when this may happen, at what price, and whether anyone is willing to take the risk and realize it.
not holding my breath as well - and using my R-D1 in the meantime.
sebastian
Bryan Lee
Expat Street Photographer
I would be more than happy with a butt ugly oversized M body with a full sized sensor and no rangefinder whatsoever, just a 3 inch screen on the back and flash holder to mount a viewfinder on the top, ultra simple, no hifalutin gimmickry or even red dot needed to sell me on that.
Robin Harrison
aka Harrison Cronbi
pizzahut88 said:
And making a bold claim, too:
24.8 Mpixel
6.3 fps
Yowsers.
Taking it this will be in the upcoming D3x and the FF-Sony?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
What about the people who based a new lens selection around the crop factor of the current M8! I'm kind of used to it now and automatically pick up my 28mm and think "yep ~ 37mm" and treat my 50's as intimate 65mm portrait lenses and reach for a 35mm to get near enough to my favourite 50mm focal length.
kevin m
Veteran
I think the 1.33 sensor is more than adequate from an IQ standpoint, but what I don't understand is that Leica is acting just like Canon and Nikon in not making any new prime lenses for it. Where's the 24mm f2.0 Summicron-d ?
Richard Marks
Rexel
'Can't be done' in commercial terms often means not viable at present. It does not mean that it is impossible but simply resources make the project non viable at the time of writing.
Richard
Richard
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
pizzahut88 said:
"Full-frame"? Full of what?
I've got a digital back with one of those teeny-weeny 24x36mm sensors; it has a ridiculously large crop factor on the Fuji GX680 I use at work.
There's no frame size that's divinely anointed as being more "full" than any other frame size. As I posted in another thread, you'd be equally justified to proclaim that the true "full" frame size is, say, the 45 x 107mm used on the Gaumont Stereo camera.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
Bryan Lee said:
How would you focus it?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Hi jlw,
you're being pedantic. In practice it's pretty clear what he meant, and he's 100% compliant with the general accepted usage of the term. Consumer photography has been 35mm for so long that it's perfectly OK nowadays to use that as an implicit frame of reference, however imprecise his expression may have been technically.
Philipp
you're being pedantic. In practice it's pretty clear what he meant, and he's 100% compliant with the general accepted usage of the term. Consumer photography has been 35mm for so long that it's perfectly OK nowadays to use that as an implicit frame of reference, however imprecise his expression may have been technically.
Philipp
bmattock
Veteran
One can dream, can't one?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The question you have to ask is this:
WHY has Leica not made a full-frame (OK, 24x36mm) sensor M?
Spite?
Cost?
Size?
As I say, they'd love one as much as anyone else, IF they could (a) make it and (b) sell it at a reasonable price. I don't know which is the barrier at the moment but I suspect it is (a). If (a) is solved, (b) will still remain, at least for a while. Not, as has been pointed out, necessarily forever; but right now, those who say something like, "I am not an engineer, but..." might do well to reflect on what they have just said.
I know a lot of people say that Leica buyers will pay anything, so (b) doesn't matter, but that's clearly nonsense: at $1,000,000 each, they'd not find many buyers. At $100,000? At $10,000...? There's a price-demand curve, even with Leicas.
Cheers,
R.
WHY has Leica not made a full-frame (OK, 24x36mm) sensor M?
Spite?
Cost?
Size?
As I say, they'd love one as much as anyone else, IF they could (a) make it and (b) sell it at a reasonable price. I don't know which is the barrier at the moment but I suspect it is (a). If (a) is solved, (b) will still remain, at least for a while. Not, as has been pointed out, necessarily forever; but right now, those who say something like, "I am not an engineer, but..." might do well to reflect on what they have just said.
I know a lot of people say that Leica buyers will pay anything, so (b) doesn't matter, but that's clearly nonsense: at $1,000,000 each, they'd not find many buyers. At $100,000? At $10,000...? There's a price-demand curve, even with Leicas.
Cheers,
R.
Damaso
Photojournalist
There are people and companies buying 5, 8 and $10,000 nikons and canons so I think that Leica could sell a full frame M camera. Of course I think it would have to be close to the M8 in price point but even if it were $1,500 more I know a lot of people who would be selling their M8s on eBay or going into debt to have one.
I think we will eventually see a full frame RF camera ,the question is when. Will it be this year, or next or the year after? I think Leica is pushing hard to have somehting this year or next. And if and when this camera does come out it won't have the kinds of technical issues that the M8 had, believe me Mr. Lee wont' allow it after what happened with the M8.
I just wish they would say something. Personally I think they haven't said much about a new camera because they don't want to kill off any exsisting M8 sales they might get. Most of us thinking about the M8 would gladly wait a bit longer for a full frame...
I think we will eventually see a full frame RF camera ,the question is when. Will it be this year, or next or the year after? I think Leica is pushing hard to have somehting this year or next. And if and when this camera does come out it won't have the kinds of technical issues that the M8 had, believe me Mr. Lee wont' allow it after what happened with the M8.
I just wish they would say something. Personally I think they haven't said much about a new camera because they don't want to kill off any exsisting M8 sales they might get. Most of us thinking about the M8 would gladly wait a bit longer for a full frame...
Damaso
Photojournalist
Seing what people pay for some of these collectibles, or what people pay for a Noctilux, is there an upper limit to what Leica nuts will pay? I do actually wonder what the spilt is between people who use it for work and generate income with it and those who use an M8 for fun. Personally I can't imagine spending that kind of bread on my hobby.
But if you have $5k to spend on your hobby (and are silly enough to spend your life savings) what's 6 or 7k? Unless Cosina or Zeiss decides to come out with a full frame, or for that matter a really nice but cheaper digital RF, Leica has the market to themselves. And people who want that Leica form factor will pay way more money than makes sense for it.
Part of me hopes that the new factory will bring down costs and that they will be smart and pass those savings onto the consumer....
But if you have $5k to spend on your hobby (and are silly enough to spend your life savings) what's 6 or 7k? Unless Cosina or Zeiss decides to come out with a full frame, or for that matter a really nice but cheaper digital RF, Leica has the market to themselves. And people who want that Leica form factor will pay way more money than makes sense for it.
Part of me hopes that the new factory will bring down costs and that they will be smart and pass those savings onto the consumer....
tomasis
Well-known
I think it will take a while.. I'm not surprised if it takes at least 3-5 years. We need wait until 35mm sensor becomes that cheap and available which you can see in entry or medium level SLR cameras as nikon d60/d300, canon xti/40d etc. then we can expect custom made sensors for RF, like off set light "receivers" or anything new invented in the sensor technology to work with all possible light rays through RF lenses.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
sitemistic said:
Um, golly gee, I think you're right.
My point -- for the satire-impaired -- is that there's no justification for this convention.
There's nothing that makes a 24x36mm sensor either better or worse for digital photography than any other particular size.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Anyone ever realize why the lenses for full frame digi SLRs are so big? The lenses have to cover a bit more then the full frame chip area. More coverage then for a full frame 35mm neg/trans.. RF lenses would have to be totally redesigned, as far as my understanding goes, for them to be optically correct for full frame sensor coverage. As I have read, there are less then half a dozen chip makers out there - Canon, Kodak, Panasonic, etc.. Sony makes chips for virtually every other camera maker. Cameras are now considered no different from other electronic devices. Look at the leaders in the electronics field. They all manufacture cameras. While there may be niche markets such as the Epson RD1, now discontinued, and the M8, manufacturers have to survive, and not stray too far from the norm to enhance that they do indeed survive. Lets hope that there will be other people such as those at Cosina and Leitz, who realize that there is still a market for passion, tradition, and forethought to design, are not dead.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Why?kbg32 said:
I'd always thought that the main reason they're so big is Retrofocus designs (up to about 50mm, nowadays) in order to clear the mirror, plus auto-diaphragms and (nowadays) autofocus.
Cheers,
R.