p.4 #1 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
retrofocus wrote:
So far it is, this is correct. But imagine the EVF-M and SL lines merge in the future - it would make the SL itself redundant. All the SL gimmicks could land in some kind of future EVF-M - biggest culprit there is that the EVF-M currently doesn't have AF capability (and video is kind of already there with EVF/LiveView, software fix/addition!).
I think the days for the "pure" SL line are numbered especially now under new ownership. It doesn't take much to see where cost can be streamlined by merging EVF-M and SL. Both the EVF-M and the SL are not the biggest sellers currently, so bundling them up might be a wise business decision. And making the camera body smaller than the SL body is what Leica should have been doing years ago IMO! This way Leica would have actually a competitive MLC system compared to the bigger camera brands with smaller package size, capability to mount both M- and (in the future) AF-based lenses. ...Show more →
Not going to happen ... at least on the surface.
The M attracts a price premium, more $ for less; the cash cow. The body style is sacrosanct, and core to the company identity.
The SL needs to have AF tracking tricks, video codecs, IBIS, and best in class viewfinder to hold ground with the big players, who are typically 18 months ahead in technology and software.
A SL mini, closer to the CL, might one day be possible; that would be your L-mount Q/M EV1/SL crossover. No S9 derivative though; an EVF is a must.
What may happen under the hood, is the same operating system and image processor are used; but in the M the code and functionality will be stripped back with processor tasking throttled to fit in the lower power/dissipation envelope the smaller M or a CL like body, is capable of.
p.4 #2 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
FrozenInTime wrote:
Not going to happen ...
Heard this multiple times before when I predicted correctly that Leica would release an EVF based M/Q hybrid with exchangeable M lens mount. It did happen.....but then I was much more certain than about my SL/EVF-M suggestion. What I can't predict is how much Leica ran already the head inside the wall sticking with the SL series. I honestly thought the SL would seize to exist a few years ago.
The M attracts a price premium, more $ for less; the cash cow. The body style is sacrosanct, and core to the company identity.
This is exactly why the SL stands no chance against the more compact M series including the EVF-M. Never.
A SL mini, closer to the CL, might one day be possible; that would be your L-mount Q/M EV1/SL crossover. No S9 derivative though; an EVF is a must.
p.4 #3 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
Well if we look at things from a behavior perspective it doesn't seem to me that Leica is contemplating dropping the SL line.
We don't really know the financials, sales numbers, or long term vision Leica has regarding the SL line. But judging from the fact that Leica is launching a new camera body, and two new lenses this month there is significant commitment to the line at this time.
I tend to give credibility to such actions over speculation.
I also hear many dismissing the EV-1 camera based on speculation. But from what I hear it's sales are actually exceeding Leica's expectations. Stephan Daniel's was recently in Milan just for an EV-1 event. From what I understand it went very well. Internaly Leica is positioning it as a distinct product line, not just an M variant as many outsiders are. I expect to see meaningful development of this new product line. I do not expect to see a combining of M and EV-1 with something like a hybrid viewfinder.
I think the true nature of Leica's vision for each of the product line won't be clear until we see the new sensor and new processor architecture Leica is investing so heavily in. That will take 3 to 5 years. We will have primary incremental development in the existing lines until then.
p.4 #4 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
retrofocus wrote:
So far it is, this is correct. But imagine the EVF-M and SL lines merge in the future - it would make the SL itself redundant. All the SL gimmicks could land in some kind of future EVF-M - biggest culprit there is that the EVF-M currently doesn't have AF capability (and video is kind of already there with EVF/LiveView, software fix/addition!).
I think the days for the "pure" SL line are numbered especially now under new ownership. It doesn't take much to see where cost can be streamlined by merging EVF-M and SL. Both the EVF-M and the SL are not the biggest sellers currently, so bundling them up might be a wise business decision. And making the camera body smaller than the SL body is what Leica should have been doing years ago IMO! This way Leica would have actually a competitive MLC system compared to the bigger camera brands with smaller package size, capability to mount both M- and (in the future) AF-based lenses. ...Show more →
And, the IBIS absence ... would require a thicker M body ... ummm, not seeing that happening too soon (although, i've long wondered if the M240 body might be big enough for IBIS).
So, the conundrum is manual focus with IBIS either means a larger body M, or the SL with adapters. Either way, you need the engineering real estate for the additional functionality.
The other thing about a "small" EVF-M ... with AF / EVF / IBIS (or not) ... the real estate for heat dissipation and battery storage. I mean, the battery life of the EVF-M (read WITHOUT AF) already is a pittance of the M. Add AF and IBIS capability to that, and you'll get what ... 6 shots per battery (I joke, but the hit will be big against that small AAA cell size battery).
THAT was the Achilles heel to the CL. I really liked the CL, and the prospect of a FF size CL, that would include the option for AF / MF in the rangefinder location (i.e. TLC corner) is attractive in spirit, but the battery life of the CL was sweet when mounting my M lenses, and abysmal when shooting with AF glass.
I can't see anything but a repeat if you keep the M size and stuff EVF, AF and IBIS, etc. into it. Heat dissipation (video especially) and battery life are pieces of the puzzle very few folks consider when they start racking up their electronics "wish list" to be tucked into a tiny M package.
p.4 #5 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
1bwana1 wrote:
We don't really know the financials, sales numbers, or long term vision Leica has regarding the SL line. But judging from the fact that Leica is launching a new camera body, and two new lenses this month there is significant commitment to the line at this time.
Working in technology, I can ensure you that the new SL camera plus lenses coming with it were in the pipeline > 5 years ago. What hits the market now underwent a long planning stretch over multiple years earlier. Therefore it is wrong to draw a conclusion from such release. We have to wait a few more years to see what is really happening. When the pipeline of new SL products is not fed anymore, it will take a couple more years to see this effect. Of course a situation might also occur - for example under new ownership - that all comes to a hard stop suddenly. But the latter might be less likely at this point.
I also hear many dismissing the EV-1 camera based on speculation. But from what I hear it's sales are actually exceeding Leica's expectations.
Depends what the expectation is in numbers. Easy to say that it exceeds original expectation if the target was set low enough to make exactly such statement for marketing reasons. Maybe Leica learned from the original SL introduction where obviously the target was set too high that they admitted that sales stayed below expectation.
I expect to see meaningful development of this new product line. I do not expect to see a combining of M and EV-1 with something like a hybrid viewfinder.
Me neither. I also don't think that a hybrid viewfinder is even in planning since it would compromise traditional rangefinder based M sales. Leica has no intent to merge rangefinder M with EVF-1. The only thing both cameras will share is the M mount and camera body size. I expect the EVF-2 to have some better manual focus aids and maybe IBIS.
If we see longer in the future a merge between EVF-M and SL as pointed out earlier, the EVF-M might lose its M-mount for replacement with the L-mount since backwards compatibility to current SL lenses with AF might be required.
p.4 #6 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
RustyBug wrote:
And, the IBIS absence ... would require a thicker M body ... ummm, not seeing that happening too soon (although, i've long thought the M240 body might be big enough for IBIS).
So, the conundrum is manual focus with IBIS either means a larger body M, or the SL with adapters. Either way, you need the engineering real estate for the additional functionality.
The other thing about a "small" EVF-M ... with AF / EVF / IBIS (or not) ... the real estate for heat dissipation and battery storage. I mean, the battery life of the EVF-M (read WITHOUT AF) already is a pittance of the M. Add AF and IBIS capability to that, and you'll get what ... 6 shots per battery (I joke, but the hit will be big agains that small AAA cell size battery).
THAT was the Achilles heel to the CL. I really liked the CL, and the prospect of a FF size CL, that would include the option for AF / MF in the rangefinder location (i.e. TLC corner) is attractive in spirit, but the battery life of the CL was sweet when mounting my M lenses, and abysmal when shooting with AF glass.
I can't see anything but a repeat if you keep the M size and stuff EVF, AF and IBIS, etc. into it. Heat dissipation (video especially) and battery life are pieces of the puzzle very few folks consider when they start racking up their electronics "wish list" to be tucked into a tiny M package.
I don't buy the reasons mentioned here why IBIS would require a thicker camera body and that heat dissipation would make a smaller camera body impossible. You know when I heard exactly these reasons first? Just around 2011 before FF MLC suddenly came out of nowhere in a small camera body with lots of features including video. Not the best battery life in Sony A7 series first generation, but it improved significantly already in gen II. FF MLCs killed the clunky DSLRs! We forget that technology continues to advance in miniaturization and also more powerful batteries will be developed.
There is one area where I don't see sizes shrink to a M gear level - with AF based lenses. These will always be bigger than purely MF based M lenses.
p.4 #7 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
retrofocus wrote:
I don't buy the reasons mentioned here why IBIS would require a thicker camera body and that heat dissipation would make a smaller camera body impossible. You know when I heard exactly these reasons first? Just around 2011 before FF MLC suddenly came out of nowhere in a small camera body with lots of features including video. Not the best battery life in Sony A7 series first generation, but it improved significantly already in gen II. FF MLCs killed the clunky DSLRs! We forget that technology continues to advance in miniaturization and also more powerful batteries will be developed.
There is one area where I don't see sizes shrink to a M gear level - with AF based lenses. These will always be bigger than purely MF based M lenses. ...Show more →
I'm just saying ... if you think the battery life in an EVF-M is challenged, adding AF / IBIS to the power consumption rate is just gonna go down from there. Battery tech has always been an area of challenging limitations. Yeah, it gets better, but at a pace that is slower than Moore's Law (imo).
Anyway, I don't see the SL morphing into an M anytime soon. Personally, if they just took the SL and relocated the EVF to the classic rangefinder position (Top Left Corner) and gave it a "flat" top, I'd think that's about as close as you'd get the bells and whistles of the SL in an "M-like" body (also noting that the grip adds real estate for battery location).
p.4 #8 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
RustyBug wrote:
And, the IBIS absence ... would require a thicker M body ... ummm, not seeing that happening too soon (although, i've long wondered if the M240 body might be big enough for IBIS).
So, the conundrum is manual focus with IBIS either means a larger body M, or the SL with adapters. Either way, you need the engineering real estate for the additional functionality.
The other thing about a "small" EVF-M ... with AF / EVF / IBIS (or not) ... the real estate for heat dissipation and battery storage. I mean, the battery life of the EVF-M (read WITHOUT AF) already is a pittance of the M. Add AF and IBIS capability to that, and you'll get what ... 6 shots per battery (I joke, but the hit will be big against that small AAA cell size battery).
THAT was the Achilles heel to the CL. I really liked the CL, and the prospect of a FF size CL, that would include the option for AF / MF in the rangefinder location (i.e. TLC corner) is attractive in spirit, but the battery life of the CL was sweet when mounting my M lenses, and abysmal when shooting with AF glass.
I can't see anything but a repeat if you keep the M size and stuff EVF, AF and IBIS, etc. into it. Heat dissipation (video especially) and battery life are pieces of the puzzle very few folks consider when they start racking up their electronics "wish list" to be tucked into a tiny M package.
But IBIS is the most requested feature for the M cameras. It is absolutely in the feature list to be added. It will also not require a thicker body. The new sensor and processor are to a large extent being driven by this. The new sensor and new processor are being driven by the need for speed. This speed seems at first thought to be unessecary in a manual focus body like M. But it is required in order to have a fully electronic shutter. This will enable Leica to remove the mechanical shutter which makes room for IBIS in the existing M form factor amoung other things. Advanced focus aids in the EV-1 (and even in RF M), advanced features in SL.
p.4 #10 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
airfrogusmc wrote:
Electronic shutter and no mechanical shutter? hmmmm.....I really have bought my last new Leica M.
They could always add vibration and sound simulation of a mechanical shutter. 😁
p.4 #12 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
1bwana1 wrote:
But IBIS is the most requested feature for the M cameras. It is absolutely in the feature list to be added. It will also not require a thicker body. The new sensor and processor are to a large extent being driven by this. The new sensor and new processor are being driven by the need for speed. This speed seems at first thought to be unessecary in a manual focus body like M. But it is required in order to have a fully electronic shutter. This will enable Leica to remove the mechanical shutter which makes room for IBIS in the existing M form factor amoung other things. Advanced focus aids in the EV-1 (and even in RF M), advanced features in SL.
E-Shutter only ... no thanks. I've been through that scenario TWICE with adapting my M lenses onto my Hassy X1D II and X2D.
Granted, you can build it with "faster" e-shutters than the Hassy ... but, the thing is that part of the processing quality is inherent to the readout speed, lines read, etc. So, if you're still wanting they top tier quality of processing from the M ... an e-shutter only puts you into either a rolling shutter scenario or a reduced file IQ potential.
Sure, it's fine for lots of folks, but for those expecting the top of the mark file IQ from the top of the mark M ... yeah, e-shutter only doesn't get it for me ... those oval handballs just don't look right.
p.4 #13 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
1bwana1 wrote:
I am sure that this will be very controversial with traditionalist. So much so that different options may be offered at first.
But really. When was the last time you purchased a new body from Leica? I think you reached your happy place some time ago?
Yeah especailly with them moving to be like everything else already out there. What made them so special to me and many others is M has truly been an alternative.
p.4 #15 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
airfrogusmc wrote:
Yeah especailly with them moving to be like everything else already out there. What made them so special to me and many others is M has truly been an alternative.
I do not think that the vibration and sound of the mechanical shutter are part of the essence of the M, same as the removable bottom or metering of the curtain was not.
p.4 #16 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
As far as sales numbers go we are dealing in a specific World when talking about market position with companies like Leica.
Leica is often called the Porsche of the camera World in this regard. Well Porsche just learned an expensive lesson when it comes to luxury brands chasing volume. Porsche just announced a restructuring to acheive desired profitability at a sales volume of 1/2 of its previous unit sales targets. Enterprises and product lines can be engineered to be profitable at lower unit numbers. This is something Leica seems to have understood well.
p.4 #17 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
airfrogusmc wrote:
Yeah especailly with them moving to be like everything else already out there. What made them so special to me and many others is M has truly been an alternative.
There are many things that serve to make Leica special in the photography space. I expect that as technology advances this will remain true.
Leica must take these risks or face a slow but sure death as a company.
p.4 #18 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
RustyBug wrote:
E-Shutter only ... no thanks. I've been through that scenario TWICE with adapting my M lenses onto my Hassy X1D II and X2D.
Granted, you can build it with "faster" e-shutters than the Hassy ... but, the thing is that part of the processing quality is inherent to the readout speed, lines read, etc. So, if you're still wanting they top tier quality of processing from the M ... an e-shutter only puts you into either a rolling shutter scenario or a reduced file IQ potential.
Sure, it's fine for lots of folks, but for those expecting the top of the mark file IQ from the top of the mark M ... yeah, e-shutter only doesn't get it for me ... those oval handballs just don't look right. ...Show more →
The A7R VI sensor gives up only the smallest bit of DR with the electronic shutter, probably not enough to notice without extreme underexposure recovery. The M12 will likely use this sensor, drop the mechanical shutter, add IBIS, and consolidate batteries with the SL series.
p.4 #20 · Could the rumored Leica SL 50 Lux II be M-like in rendering?
SrMi wrote:
An e-shutter, like in A1ii, neither compromises on rolling shutter or on IQ.
It’ll be interesting to see if they use that sensor or the A7R VI sensor. Not sure the A1 II sensor will still be cost prohibitive for Leica. Also it would be weird for the M12 to have that sensor and IBIS while the SL cameras gasp for air so to speak.
