cnguyen
Established
How about a new digital Leica tri-elmar with 28/35/50 on the digital M so I can use my current Tri-elmar as 35/50/75. I was told that leica wil make all new M lenses useable for both old M cameras and new DM. My question is how Leica going to handle the framing issues on the new DM say if I mounted my tri elmar the frames will show as 35/50/75 ? or if I mounted the 15mm on an old M it should show me the 28mm finder ?
Khaled
Chaka
I would really like to have a 30mm/f2 lens (equivalent to 40mm) with corresponding framelines on the camera.
Chuck A
Chuck A
I would definitely consider buying one. It may take a while to put the cash together at the price point being discussed though. Somebody brought up earlier about a price lower than $5000 because digital cameras are not as long term as film. I agree with this.
If the DM is built like an original M and has the excellent Leica view/rangefinder it will be a real hit. It can't have the QC problems of the R-D1. I would have seriously considered it but for these problems. Other than the R-D1 the viewfinders on the majority of digitals are abysmal.
The 1.33 crop factor that has been discussed is good. The 1.5 crop of the R-D1 and most DSLRs is too limiting to wide angle photography. I rarely go wider than 35mm so a 28mm lens gives me about 37mm.
The sensor has to give image quality at least as good as the DMR. It has to be rugged and last a while. A film Leica easily lasts for decades and costs half of what the DM is projected. If I am going to spend this kind of money for a camera then it has got to last me for a Looong time. This era of disposable digital cameras has got to end.
If the shutter is redesigned it has to be as quiet as the M series. That is another problem with the R-D1.
For me a great viewfinder, high quality sensor and longevity are the keys.
If the DM is built like an original M and has the excellent Leica view/rangefinder it will be a real hit. It can't have the QC problems of the R-D1. I would have seriously considered it but for these problems. Other than the R-D1 the viewfinders on the majority of digitals are abysmal.
The 1.33 crop factor that has been discussed is good. The 1.5 crop of the R-D1 and most DSLRs is too limiting to wide angle photography. I rarely go wider than 35mm so a 28mm lens gives me about 37mm.
The sensor has to give image quality at least as good as the DMR. It has to be rugged and last a while. A film Leica easily lasts for decades and costs half of what the DM is projected. If I am going to spend this kind of money for a camera then it has got to last me for a Looong time. This era of disposable digital cameras has got to end.
If the shutter is redesigned it has to be as quiet as the M series. That is another problem with the R-D1.
For me a great viewfinder, high quality sensor and longevity are the keys.
Patman
Established
A lens i find most usefull is my 105mm Macro lens, i have one for my Kodak digital and one for my R8 both excellent lense's for macro work or portraits. A good macro i feel would be essential, not that it would stop me from buying it because it is a definate must for me! Also important is minimizing noise.
rvaubel
Well-known
Sean
What everyone else has said:
1) 21mm/f2.0 summilux
2) 18mm f/2.8 summicron
3) 28mm/f1.4 summilux
Nobody makes anything like these. They would be perfect for the wide end. They would be pricey but Leica owners, if not rich, are at least dreamers who will wait and save and scrimp to obtain their object of desire. Meanwhile, there are a lot of cheap, used lenses to tide one other. I'd pop fror the 21mm in a heatbeat even though I couldnt afford it. On my Canon 20Da my favorite lowlite (and lowlife) lens is the 24mm/f1.4. But the combination is too intrusive for what I am doing. Leica dM to the rescue please!
Rex
What everyone else has said:
1) 21mm/f2.0 summilux
2) 18mm f/2.8 summicron
3) 28mm/f1.4 summilux
Nobody makes anything like these. They would be perfect for the wide end. They would be pricey but Leica owners, if not rich, are at least dreamers who will wait and save and scrimp to obtain their object of desire. Meanwhile, there are a lot of cheap, used lenses to tide one other. I'd pop fror the 21mm in a heatbeat even though I couldnt afford it. On my Canon 20Da my favorite lowlite (and lowlife) lens is the 24mm/f1.4. But the combination is too intrusive for what I am doing. Leica dM to the rescue please!
Rex
Jim Watts
Still trying to See.
Sean Reid said:
I could live without the 15/2.8 (20mm at x1.33, which we assume Leitz are now committed to on an MD) which would be large and expensive. I almost certainly couldn't afford it in any case and I'm sure given the probable price the market would be limited.
Size (as others have mentioned) and to a certain extent weight is generally an important consideration though. I requested a 21/2.0, but how large and heavy would it need to be if it covered full frame 35mm as well? My other request was a 27 or 28/2.0. I would prefer f1.4 for this lens, but again not if it was too large. I don't really want any of the lenses to be bigger or heavier than my VC 28/1.9 and I think that it would be a mistake for Leitz to produce lenses that did not cover full frame 35mm to get the size reduction. It would would limit their market and not allow for a possible future full frame digital body.
Last edited:
S
Sean Reid
Guest
Hi Jim,
What about the current 28/2.0?
Cheers,
Sean
What about the current 28/2.0?
Cheers,
Sean
Jim Watts
Still trying to See.
Sean,
I did realise there was a Leitz 28/2.0, but I haven't handled one so I'm not sure about the size and weight compared to the VC 28/1.9, which like you I find a very good lens in any case, so it would have to be smaller for the price differencial to make me change. It's the crop factor of x1.33 on a DM, if reports are accurate, that troubles me about a 28mm on this body. 28 x 1.33 = 37.2, I know thats not much narrower an angle than 35, but I'd like to get as close as possible to 35 ( too many years use fixating my vision I suppose
). 35/1.33 = 26.3mm (I had said 27), but I don't suppose they would want to produce a lens that sits between present 24's & 28's, unless it was for the reduced sensor size and as I said this might limit their market too much.
The 21mm though translates nicely by x1.33 = 27.9.
Jim
I did realise there was a Leitz 28/2.0, but I haven't handled one so I'm not sure about the size and weight compared to the VC 28/1.9, which like you I find a very good lens in any case, so it would have to be smaller for the price differencial to make me change. It's the crop factor of x1.33 on a DM, if reports are accurate, that troubles me about a 28mm on this body. 28 x 1.33 = 37.2, I know thats not much narrower an angle than 35, but I'd like to get as close as possible to 35 ( too many years use fixating my vision I suppose
). 35/1.33 = 26.3mm (I had said 27), but I don't suppose they would want to produce a lens that sits between present 24's & 28's, unless it was for the reduced sensor size and as I said this might limit their market too much.The 21mm though translates nicely by x1.33 = 27.9.
Jim
Jim Watts
Still trying to See.
I suppose I should have checked out the size of the Leitz 28/2.0 before now.
Length = 40.8mm
Max Dia. = 53mm
Weight = 270g
http://www.leica-camera.com/imperia/md/content/pdf/objektive/datenbltterm-objektive/6.pdf
I think this is almost identical to my VC 28/1.9
Length = 40.8mm
Max Dia. = 53mm
Weight = 270g
http://www.leica-camera.com/imperia/md/content/pdf/objektive/datenbltterm-objektive/6.pdf
I think this is almost identical to my VC 28/1.9
Dougg
Seasoned Member
Jim, the most noticeable difference is in length. Figures quoted from B&H specs:Jim Watts said:
Lens Ultron / Summicron
Filter Size 46mm / 46mm
f/Stop Range 1.9-22 / 2-16
Minimum Focus 2.3' / 2.3'
Angle of View 75 Deg / 75 Deg
Groups/Elements 7/9 / 6/9
Length 2.5" / 1.6"
Max Dia 2.2" / 2.1"
Weight 0.58 lb / 0.60 lb
S
Sean Reid
Guest
Hi Jim,
They're basically the same size and weight (in practice). I can't recall exact numbers but they're in my review of wide lenses. If it's any consolation, the view we've been seeing in RF camera frame lines all these years has been closer to 37mm than 35mm.
Cheers,
Sean
They're basically the same size and weight (in practice). I can't recall exact numbers but they're in my review of wide lenses. If it's any consolation, the view we've been seeing in RF camera frame lines all these years has been closer to 37mm than 35mm.
Cheers,
Sean
boilerdoc2
Well-known
Lots of good ideas here. I WILL be getting one.. Already saving up and have old equipment ready to trade. New lenses don't seem necessary to me. The best viewfinder is, a la the Z Ikon. Top quality at ISO >800 is important. Spot metering would be really nice and the live LCD for closeups is interesting idea. A slow buffer is what has kept me from the R D1. I think Leica may not realize the pent up demand for this type of groundbreaking camera. Epson got close but too many negatives kept it from my hands. I can hardly wait. The M7 is getting a real workout and the Digi M will be huge, if the price is <5K.
ghost
Well-known
a smaller 21/2.8 (or f2 if they can keep the size down. hood should fit in a shirt pocket.).
leather case, like the hexar rf's.
maybe, just maaaybe, a 12-15-18 tri-elmar and non-zoom accessory viewfinder.
no framelines for 50 and 90mm lenses. 21/75, 28, 35. like the zeiss ikon.
leather case, like the hexar rf's.
maybe, just maaaybe, a 12-15-18 tri-elmar and non-zoom accessory viewfinder.
no framelines for 50 and 90mm lenses. 21/75, 28, 35. like the zeiss ikon.
N
NoTx
Guest
Odd thought. COuldn't they make a lens that would work at F/1.4 on crops and just require a stop to f/2 for film? THinking like how Large Format works...
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
I'd like to see some future upgrade path. In other words, If I'm going to drop mucho dinero on a digi-m I'd like to be assured that it won't be built with planned obsolescence in mind. Let me use my summicron 50 (as I understand will be possible) and I'd like equivalents to the 24,35, 50 and 90mm focal lengths. I'm definitely planning to buy... if it's a good product and the price is reasonable. Sean, thanks for letting us provide some feedback.
Ron
Ron
Last edited:
bronekkozka
Established
Everyone is talking about crop factors....I shoot digital for work ( Canon 1DsMk2 ) and as of two days ago a Bessa R2A for....pleasure....getting re-aquainted with the idea of shoting something with-out a brief....but anyway....
Is it set in stone that the gigital M will be a crop, the dif between DSLR crop & full frame is massive from a shooting point of view (....for me).....why not a full frame digital M...not like we are talking a budhet camera here. This would also avoid all these issues dedicated lenses, dif add on finders etc.
I really like the idea of a "special" BW only version....no bayer and little AA, would be great....it would be pin sharp and punchy...nice idea....Another thing I'd like to see is ifra red sensativity... range finder would be great for this, have the "black" filter on RF is clear...better than DSLR...again this would work well with the "special eddition B+W" version.
The screen should be an OLED 2.5", OLED would be good from a battery life pov and could be viewed in sunlight...I like the idea of live preview for "tricky" focussing....
Just had a thought....on frame lines...no optical frame lines!, the rf is normal focussing is all normal but the fameline are created digitally and "projected" into the viewfinder....to look the same but this would mean all lenses could have frame lines....
Hope the Digital M is good, loving RF and love digi....would be great......
Oh lenses I'd get 24 35 50 and an 85 or 90
Bronek
www.kozka.com
Is it set in stone that the gigital M will be a crop, the dif between DSLR crop & full frame is massive from a shooting point of view (....for me).....why not a full frame digital M...not like we are talking a budhet camera here. This would also avoid all these issues dedicated lenses, dif add on finders etc.
I really like the idea of a "special" BW only version....no bayer and little AA, would be great....it would be pin sharp and punchy...nice idea....Another thing I'd like to see is ifra red sensativity... range finder would be great for this, have the "black" filter on RF is clear...better than DSLR...again this would work well with the "special eddition B+W" version.
The screen should be an OLED 2.5", OLED would be good from a battery life pov and could be viewed in sunlight...I like the idea of live preview for "tricky" focussing....
Just had a thought....on frame lines...no optical frame lines!, the rf is normal focussing is all normal but the fameline are created digitally and "projected" into the viewfinder....to look the same but this would mean all lenses could have frame lines....
Hope the Digital M is good, loving RF and love digi....would be great......
Oh lenses I'd get 24 35 50 and an 85 or 90
Bronek
www.kozka.com
einolu
Well-known
The camera is already done, 'sbeen in developement for a while, will be out this september (or so they say).
bronekkozka said:
pfogle
Well-known
Lots of people still rate the M2, and even the M3 as a great camera. I think now that the resolution wars are almost over, most of us could live with the next generation chips for a few years.
For myself, I'd like to see product stability - a long term commitment to a design. So, for me, that would have to be FF and about 16-20 Mpixels. The lenses available are great, especially now Zeiss have joined in.
My dream kit? FF Leica digital body, 20 MP, low noise, using 4 AA NiMH batteries in the baseplate with motorized shutter wind. The 21mm Biogon, 28 and 35 and 50 'crons. Perhaps a 50 or 75 'lux for the real shallow DOF once in a while. And an M mount that will allow future upgrade to AF lenses would be a logical step.
Also, removable AA and IR filters would be good - shouldn't be too hard to implement and would make for a more versatile tool.
For myself, I'd like to see product stability - a long term commitment to a design. So, for me, that would have to be FF and about 16-20 Mpixels. The lenses available are great, especially now Zeiss have joined in.
My dream kit? FF Leica digital body, 20 MP, low noise, using 4 AA NiMH batteries in the baseplate with motorized shutter wind. The 21mm Biogon, 28 and 35 and 50 'crons. Perhaps a 50 or 75 'lux for the real shallow DOF once in a while. And an M mount that will allow future upgrade to AF lenses would be a logical step.
Also, removable AA and IR filters would be good - shouldn't be too hard to implement and would make for a more versatile tool.
willie_901
Veteran
There is no need for new lenses. What is needed is a 36 x 24 mm sensor so there is no crop factor. Until there is a full-frame sensor on a M series/Bessa/ZI style camera I will not invest in digital photography.
willie
willie
R
RML
Guest
I'm glad I didn't see any remarks about full frame sensors pop up. God only knows what kind of flame war that could ignite....