Graham Mitchell wrote:
Exactly, the size, the weight, the excellent lenses. All high priorities to most people.
Yeah, but in the new world of mirrorless cameras, there are many options that are both smaller and lighter. The rangefinder is the compelling part of the M system, to me.
+1 Right now - and likely into the foreseeable future - Leica is unique in offering the traditional rangefinder/ OVF combo. If they all of a sudden offer an EVF only model or, heaven forbid, were to cease offering a rangefinder version, there is simply no way they could compete against the barrage of Sony's, Fuji's and who knows who else - all of which have much greater technological advantages. Besides their lenses - which can be used on any mirrorless (and likely with fewer and fewer issues in the future) - the rangefinder is the one thing which sets leica apart. Without it, they would be better off to abandon making cameras at all and just stick to selling lenses.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
+1 Right now - and likely into the foreseeable future - Leica is unique in offering the traditional rangefinder/ OVF combo. If they all of a sudden offer an EVF only model or, heaven forbid, were to cease offering a rangefinder version, there is simply no way they could compete against the barrage of Sony's, Fuji's and who knows who else - all of which have much greater technological advantages. Besides their lenses - which can be used on any mirrorless (and likely with fewer and fewer issues in the future) - the rangefinder is the one thing which sets leica apart. Without it, they would be better off to abandon making cameras at all and just stick to selling lenses. ...Show more →
um, full frame sets them apart. nobody else allows you to use those wonderful lenses on their natural format. even without the rangefinder that is a pretty good reason for many people to want one (and for some of those people an evf is preferible). other producers don't seem to be rushing to compete in that space, they're just now saying to themselves "so do you think anyone would actually buy a FF mirrorless? lets do some more market research." leica doesn't compete with canikonsony anyway, they're a premium camera producer. if they make an evf only camera it'll still be expensive, it will still be low volume, and some people will still see value in it over any hypothetical competition.
sebboh wrote:
um, full frame sets them apart. nobody else allows you to use those wonderful lenses on their natural format. even without the rangefinder that is a pretty good reason for many people to want one (and for some of those people an evf is preferible). other producers don't seem to be rushing to compete in that space, they're just now saying to themselves "so do you think anyone would actually buy a FF mirrorless? lets do some more market research." leica doesn't compete with canikonsony anyway, they're a premium camera producer. if they make an evf only camera it'll still be expensive, it will still be low volume, and some people will still see value in it over any hypothetical competition....Show more →
Full frame set Kodak apart with their DSC-14n at the beginning of the DSLR time. U can see what it brought them today.
Sure leica is the only one with a full frame sensor at the moment, but who knows how many full frame camera's with EVF or LV we have at next Photokina. U just know its coming.
Canon and nikon now even have a consumer FF dslr, sony even has a FF compact. So u just know it won't take long for the mirrorless camera's to follow.
When those FF mirrorless camera's arrive, the rangefinderless M basically turns into a new Hasselblad Lunar. Only nicer materials and the "hand build in germany" sets them apart from other manufacturers with much cheaper camera's with better electronics inside. And even the leica lenses can be used with all of them by using an adapter.
They would have an advantage for a year, maybe less, and after that their clientbase would shrink to a small group of people who want to pay 6 times as much for the same camera with a different logo.
With the rangefinder they have no competition, even not when sony introduced a state of the art FF sensor mirrorless with native M mount. They have a giant amount of compartible lenses and they would have a known client base who keeps using the system no matter what.
They would be crazy to give their position up just because their the first with a full frame sensor.
Bijltje wrote:
With the rangefinder they have no competition, even not when sony introduced a state of the art FF sensor mirrorless with native M mount. They have a giant amount of compartible lenses and they would have a known client base who keeps using the system no matter what.
They would be crazy to give their position up just because their the first with a full frame sensor.
who said they have to give up that position. also, i have my doubts about a FF mirrorless that works decently with m lenses in less 2 years (though i am always hopeful). finally, leica will always be pretty much only for people willing to pay a ton extra for build and design. it's not like rangefinder lovers unwilling to pay $5,000 for a camera can get one from leica (leica doesn't get any value from people buying used m8s).
I don't think the FF mirror-less advantage will last for Leica that long. My guess is no more than maybe 4-6mo. once the M starts shipping. I expect a non-Leica FF mirrorless in 2013.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I don't think the FF mirror-less advantage will last for Leica that long. My guess is no more than maybe 4-6mo. once the M starts shipping. I expect a non-Leica FF mirrorless in 2013.
i hope your right, the interviews i've seen from photokina make me suspect there is a fair bit of resistance to the idea.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I don't think the FF mirror-less advantage will last for Leica that long. My guess is no more than maybe 4-6mo. once the M starts shipping. I expect a non-Leica FF mirrorless in 2013.
I did not see any comments about the FF Sony, but if they can make this, they can probably make mirrorless with interchangeable lenses in near future, too.
sebboh wrote:
um, full frame sets them apart. nobody else allows you to use those wonderful lenses on their natural format. even without the rangefinder that is a pretty good reason for many people to want one (and for some of those people an evf is preferible). other producers don't seem to be rushing to compete in that space, they're just now saying to themselves "so do you think anyone would actually buy a FF mirrorless? lets do some more market research." leica doesn't compete with canikonsony anyway, they're a premium camera producer. if they make an evf only camera it'll still be expensive, it will still be low volume, and some people will still see value in it over any hypothetical competition....Show more →
The most important differentiator for me is the sensor. Pictures from M8 and M9 just look different than Canikon and if I understand it correctly, Leica wants that look in the new camera as well.
sebboh wrote:
i hope your right, the interviews i've seen from photokina make me suspect there is a fair bit of resistance to the idea.
Just like Steve Jobs claimed Apple had no plans to make a smartphone.
Most of the manufacturers have current products that could suffer if they per-announced their FF plans. They also do not want to give their game plan away to the competition. It's really just inevitable given the rise of mirrorless and the availability of relatively inexpensive FF sensors from Sony (the price only gets cheaper the more manufacturers use the 24MP FF sensor for instance). Anyway, I guess we will find out soon enough. All that said, the Leica M will still more than likely be unique in the marketplace for it's combination of traditional features married to modern capabilities.
sebboh wrote:
i hope your right, the interviews i've seen from photokina make me suspect there is a fair bit of resistance to the idea.
Agreed, sebboh. I've been saying the same for a couple of years. Sensor size is somewhat arbitrary when you're designing a new camera system from the ground up, since you don't need to take native lenses into account, and all of the big manufacturers have already decided on the sensor size that they consider to be the correct balance between size, cost and IQ for their mirrorless systems. Just because there is a relatively small group of users like us that'd like to adapt all kinds of manual lenses to a FF mirrorless doesn't mean that there is a real incentive for the camera companies to make such a thing.
I think the incentive to go FF for a number of companies is the huge gap between a $1200 NEX-7 and a $7000 Leica M. Lots of money to be made in that area I think.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I think the incentive to go FF for a number of companies is the huge gap between a $1200 NEX-7 and a $7000 Leica M. Lots of money to be made in that area I think.
but most people throwing down $2-5k for a camera want it to have a full line of autofocus lenses. companies are not sure that market niche is big enough to pay for the development of that lens line. leica of course wouldn't have that problem as they have already made the lens line (minus the AF of course). i think what the marketing departments in charge are struggling with is that the only way the FF mirrorless niche is big enough to be worth the investment is if it destroys most of the FF dslr market. obviously this gives sony and fuji a much greater incentive to pursue it than canikon.
sebboh wrote:
but most people throwing down $2-5k for a camera want it to have a full line of autofocus lenses. companies are not sure that market niche is big enough to pay for the development of that lens line. leica of course wouldn't have that problem as they have already made the lens line (minus the AF of course). i think what the marketing departments in charge are struggling with is that the only way the FF mirrorless niche is big enough to be worth the investment is if it destroys most of the FF dslr market. obviously this gives sony and fuji a much greater incentive to pursue it than canikon....Show more →
Yes, true. Seeing how quickly Fuji was able to develop a pretty decent line of lenses for the X-Pro1, I really do see that happening with a FF mirrorless - particularly given how much money there is to be made with the lenses. For someone like Fuji and even Sony, doing so provides a higher margin upgrade path for their mirrorless users (and it's a wide open market where they are less likely to see competition from Canikon). Anyway, I suspect whatever happens will be revealed within the next year.
sebboh wrote:
.. leica doesn't get any value from people buying used m8s.
I think Leica still get lots of value from people buying used Leica bodies, not only used M8/9s but also the older film Ms. Secondary revenue and profit will be generated with the sale of their lenses (where there is little or no competition) and also for servicing and repairs of existing cameras, especially the digital Ms.
I think the bodies are not where most manufacturers make the most profit, rather it is in selling lenses. We may buy one Leica M9 or M whatever, but how many of us end up with more than a few M mount lenses and a few of those could be Leica ones? Maybe in the beginning one would start with more affordable CV lenses and slowly realize some of the limitations and then progress next to Zeiss and some eventually end up buying a few Leica lenses. It never ends does it? Else I don't think you many of you will be spending your time here on the forums?
I also think that many here mistakenly think that Leica M owners are either very wealthy or that they are irrational enough to buy whatever premium cameras Leica produces. I can tell you that this is probably not true. For instance although I am willing to fork out some hard earned savings for a Leica M body (which by the way is not that much more expensive than a D4 or 1DX), I just don't see the value of paying extra $$ for a Leica X2 or a DLux 6 and I think quite a few of my fellow M shooters agree with me?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yes, true. Seeing how quickly Fuji was able to develop a pretty decent line of lenses for the X-Pro1, I really do see that happening with a FF mirrorless - particularly given how much money there is to be made with the lenses. For someone like Fuji and even Sony, doing so provides a higher margin upgrade path for their mirrorless users (and it's a wide open market where they are less likely to see competition from Canikon). Anyway, I suspect whatever happens will be revealed within the next year.
The problem is lens size with native FF lenses. That's partially why these companies choose aps-c and smaller as the basis for their mirrorless lines. We're lucky that a few of the companies at least chose aps-c. For a FF mirrorless, we're talking about larger lenses and potentially new, larger mounts, which starts defeating the purpose of size. I know that Leica manages with smallish lenses, but their lenses are very expensive, and the sensors and software also accommodate them with special designs.
I think FF mirrorless is still several years away. Sony will likely be first, but it won't be until they're ready to move on from SLT.
Mirek Elsner wrote:
The most important differentiator for me is the sensor. Pictures from M8 and M9 just look different than Canikon and if I understand it correctly, Leica wants that look in the new camera as well.
It's not just the look that's a differentiator, but also how the sensor toppings are optimized for RF lenses. It will be really interesting to see how the M's sensor compares against the M9's with some unfriendly lenses, such as the CV15 and ZM21 f/4.5.
And sensor toppings will make or break adapting alt lenses to any future Sony (or other brand's) FF EVIL. In this respect, I'm very curious to see how the VG900 works. Will they go Fuji's route with a supposedly very thick cover glass? Will there be an AA filter as well? I would imagine the VG900 has an AA filter, which from my understanding is mandatory for decent video. If so, compatibility will likely be best with SLR and longer RF lenses. It will leave those who wish to use wider RF glass looking at Leica as possibly the only solution, and maybe that will be enough for Leica, combined with their traditional rangefinder following.
douglasf13 wrote:
The problem is lens size with native FF lenses. That's partially why these companies choose aps-c and smaller as the basis for their mirrorless lines. We're lucky that a few of the companies at least chose aps-c. For a FF mirrorless, we're talking about larger lenses and potentially new, larger mounts, which starts defeating the purpose of size. I know that Leica manages with smallish lenses, but their lenses are very expensive, and the sensors and software also accommodate them with special designs.
I think FF mirrorless is still several years away. Sony will likely be first, but it won't be until they're ready to move on from SLT. ...Show more →
Lens size is definitely a factor. Where was it that I read the Japan/asian market is pushing for really small cameras, whereas NA and Europe are resisting that trend? Might have been DPR's Fuji interview.
Maybe in a couple years when on-sensor phase detect pixels are good enough, combined with contrast detect AF, that we'll see someone like Sony do away with the SLT mirror system and go purely mirrorless.
One thing about Leica's lens philosophy is it has always been about making the smallest size and highest quality lens possible. For example, compare the 50AA with the new Zeiss 55 f/1.4 (ignoring the one stop difference). Yes, there is software intervention in the digital Ms, but it's not really the fault of the lenses, since those worked fine with film, rather, it's the way sensors are made. Hopefully the new M's sensor addresses this better with less need for software correction (and again, the correction isn't for removing CA, distortion or enhancing sharpness, *caugh* Fuji, rather just for the color shift issue and stronger than film vignetting).
Joe: right on! BTW, that sure sounds like me for the last couple years...
Mike Tuomey wrote:
One or two trips to Solms or NJ for repairs under warranty that could involve problems like sensor replacement would likely make up that difference, Edward. Based on my experience, repair work is more than just a remote possibility for the M9.
I agree that if the price difference is not that much, I would definitely consider a new M9 or at least a used one with some warranty left, enough warranty for you to shoot the camera a fair bit and see if there are potential faults (other than RF alignment which can be rectified relatively cheaply). I won't hesitate buying a used Canonikon camera without warranty as I think they are generally quite reliable but I believe with the Leica digital Ms, being a lower volume hand made product, there are higher chances for things going wrong.
Coming from a highly custom and hand made electronics manufacturing industry where almost every single of our product is different from the next, I can tell you that most if not over 95% of our product failures can be found within the first 8 hours of solid testing in the factory (based on empirical statistics), and I believe Leica probably does similar testing on their cameras. Unfortunately this is not 100% fool proof and there will be a few that leave the factory with problems undetected. This is the nature of low volume hand made/assembled products. So I would suggest to potential buyers of the new or used M8/9 that you thoroughly "use" or test your camera in many different conditions to try and provoke and find any potential fault early. For instance, I bought my M9 used but almost brand new, partly because I could not find a new one in stock. Within a few months, the camera developed a faulty LCD and had to be replaced by Leica under warranty. Ever since that incident (almost 24 months ago), I have not had other serious issues with my M9 and I shoot it in quite demanding conditions. The most recent problem I had was when I may have accidentally spilled some lemonade on the shutter release and after a few days, I could not turn the camera switch on or engage the shutter release. This is entirely my fault and not the camera. I'm waiting for Leica's prognosis and hopefully it comes back fine. Which is another reason as to why I am definitely going to get the new weather sealed Leica M
